Bret Fausett wrote:

I support and second Beau. If he is elected to be the Board liaison, however, I'd like to see us have a new person in this position.

I had not intended to have the elections at this meeting, but the July 14 one -- which is why I hadn't really mentioned much of this yet. My intention for Monday's meeting was to get directions from NARALO on issues and priorities for the ICANN meeting coming up in two weeks. I would also like to take the opportunity on Monday to review the last year -- what did we do well, what did we do badly, what we should be doing going forward. We have had a number of examples where NARALO's initiative affected ALAC's action on issues, and I would like to solicit feedback. (Even if you cannot attend the Monday meeting and have comments on NARALO performance since the San Juan meeting formation, please forward them to this list. All comments and criticisms are welcome, especially the constructive ones. :-) ) Now, back to the voting... Up for election is one of the two NARALO reps to ALAC, for a two-year term. In our formation last year, Robert was elected for two years, Beau for one -- that was a one-time thing to allow for ongoing staggered two year terms. Beau has explicitly indicated his interest to stand for re-relection. Also up for election are the positions of chair and secretariat, which are one-year terms. Darlene and myself have both expressed a desire to stand for re-election to our respective positions. As for Bret's point about Beau's potential to act in both capacities (NARALO rep to ALAC _and_ ALAC rep to the Board), I have received clarification from the ALAC chair. No regulations exist to prevent one from holding both positions. Personally I believe that the two jobs each present enough of a workload to suggest that they would be best done by two different people. But it would be Beau's call, should he become elected as ALAC's Board rep. - Evan

I tend to agree with Bret -- maybe someone from the potentially new ALS, New York ISOC, might like to stand for election, if I were to be elected to the board liaison post. My understanding for the timing, correct me if I'm wrong, is that the board liaison candidates are supposed to make their case to the ALAC at the Paris meeting, with the vote shortly after the meeting, so we will know one in advance of the other... On the other hand, I have heard there's increasing concern to try to limit travel costs, so to some, there is appeal for having people wear two hats. I don't think that should influence us one way or the other, but just FYI. -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Bret Fausett Sent: Sun 6/8/2008 12:30 PM To: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] NARALO elections (was Re: 08/10 - Representativeto ALAC) My only thought here is that both positions are travel-funded by ICANN, and we maximize the ALAC's footprint at ICANN meetings by having two people travel, instead of only one. -- Bret On Jun 8, 2008, at 7:11 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

As for Bret's point about Beau's potential to act in both capacities (NARALO rep to ALAC _and_ ALAC rep to the Board), I have received clarification from the ALAC chair. No regulations exist to prevent one from holding both positions. Personally I believe that the two jobs each present enough of a workload to suggest that they would be best done by two different people. But it would be Beau's call, should he become elected as ALAC's Board rep.

------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------ *** Scanned