It's good, I've added it along with Kieren's on our blog feeds: http://www.knujon.com/ -------------------------------------------------- From: "Beau Brendler" <beaubrendler@earthlink.net> Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 1:05 PM To: <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [NA-Discuss] Danny Younger's new blog
at least, I think it's new:
http://icannology.blogspot.com
Anybody been reading it? It's pretty good. Kind of the perfect format for Danny.
By the way, I'm shooting my mouth off about ICANN over at ThinkerNet -- please feel free to jump in and argue, disagree, etc.
http://www.internetevolution.com/messages.asp?piddl_msgthreadid=234762&piddl...
-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> Sent: Oct 11, 2010 11:58 PM To: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson@gov.nu.ca>, Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org>, Beau Brendler <beaubrendler@earthlink.net> Cc: "na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] WTF?
The situation is not that simple. Prior to the changes, section 5 of the Operating Principles (OP) started with:
"The governance of the NARALO will be exercised by a General Assembly, formed by 2 representatives of each member ALS and 2 members from among the unaffiliated individuals." In practice, we have used just 1 representative per ALS and Unaffiliated Members, but according to that Unaffiliated Members were represented in General Assembly votes. The revised OP changes that 2 to become 1 in line with our existing practices.
However, section 15 says:
"These Operating Principles will take effect when adopted by not less than 70% of the active North American At-Large Structures. They may be amended at any time by an affirmative vote of not less than 70% of active North American At-Large Structures."
So although the Unaffiliated Members are represented in votes of the General Assembly, they were NOT deemed to participate in revision of the Rules of Procedure. We have always referred to the Unaffiliated Members as a "Virtual ALS", but the OP never included such a reference. I was not an active participant in writing the original OP, but I would like to think that this was an inadvertent omission and not deliberate. If I had noticed this during the OP revision process, I certainly would have raised the issue.
I can't speak for why staff reported the vote as they did, but based on these rules, it would appear that the error was in including the Unaffiliated Members in the poll, and not how the results were reported.
I would suggest that we fix this with due haste.
In parallel, we also need to look at our Rules of Procedure. These replicate the "2 per ALS" and there are a number of other places where they conflict with the OP.
Alan
At 11/10/2010 11:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
Hi all,
I do not believe that Beau put in in an SOI to become the "vote" of the unaffilated members nor do I believe that they voted for him to be their "voice". This is why we entrenched this position into the changes to the RoP. We need to have more formal votes for this position. I do not believe that our RoP gave a vote to the unaffiliated voice prior to the vote so this is now in force but was not before.
That is my understanding of it, anyways.
D
Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Sation 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson@gov.nu.ca
________________________________
From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Mon 10/11/2010 11:10 PM To: Beau Brendler Cc: na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] WTF?
On 11 October 2010 19:38, Beau Brendler <beaubrendler@earthlink.net> wrote:
This has probably been explained before, but:
Please note that Beau Brendler participated in the vote on behalf of the unaffiliated members. While his vote is visible on the above URL, it is not counted towards quorum as according to rule 15, an affirmative vote of not less than 70% of active North American At-Large Structures is required to amend the NARALO Operating Principles.
What does that mean? Let's not pretend to give unaffiliated members a vote (in this particular case, a yes) if it's not going to be counted.
Beau, I don't know why it was not counted and will check into it. If you participated in the vote then your vote counts and is part of the quorum. I apologize on behalf of the process that may have inadvertently missed your mention.
Of course, as you and I both know, the purpose of this vote was to codify and formalize what had until been an informal and not-fully-recognised role of unaffiliated members and their representatives within NARALO and At-Large.
- Evan ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------