Re: [NA-Discuss] Ramping up for the election - General Procedures
Actually, according to the NARALO operating procedures, the process is a bit more formal than that. Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will oversee the process. As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating that he/she meet the following criteria: - be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list; - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the North American region as defined by ICANN; - not be a member of a certified ALS. Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes a NARALO ALS). I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS, is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status. Alan At 31/05/2013 01:04 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
... and unaffiliated members will be polled, and Alan will cast a single vote collectively on their behalf -- based on, but not necessarily directed by -- that poll.
Come to thing of it... going forward, we probably need to have a process amongst the unaffiliated members for selecting their reprentative.
In the past I seem to recall this was done by consensus.
- Evan
On 31 May 2013 12:50, Garth Bruen <<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss>gbruen at knujon.com> wrote:
Thank you Darlene. To strip this down to the bare bones:
Any documented NARALO member can run for office, and any NARALO member can nominate.
As for the vote itself, each ALS has ONE vote.
On 5/31/13 7:49 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will oversee the process.
As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating that he/she meet the following criteria:
- be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list; - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the North American region as defined by ICANN; - not be a member of a certified ALS.
Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes a NARALO ALS).
I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS, is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status.
Thank you Alan. This is Rule 17. ISOC Chapters come and go. A former co-worker at CORE has been starting a chapter in Norway, where a chapter existed, became moribund, and finally was dissolved. At Large Structure certifications come and go also. The 2007 MoU establishing NARALO contains this decertification responsibility: 5. "Agreed Responsiblities of the NARALO" ... f) "Providing advice to the ICANN At Large Advisory Committee about the certification and, if necessary, decertification of different ALSs and the use of outreach and communication tool across the region." EURALO has a draft decertification procedure document. LACRALO and AFRALO have published substantive criteria. The NARALO criteria is tied only to "voting", and so capable of being met by a single person representing him or her self as an organization. For instance, the Canadian Association for Open Source appears quiessent, Peter Salus stopped blogging there in 2006, Bill Traynor in 2007, Evan Liebovitch in 2008, with only Russell McOrmond continuing to January, 2012. No "recent posts" reflected in its log for the past twelve months, three only in the past twenty four months, six only, and all by the same person, for the past 36 months. I've no idea how this particular structure continues to meet the ALAC certification criteria. Another peculiarity is Knujon, which appears to be two persons, Garth and Robert Bruen, principals of a Massachusetts LLC and a Vermont S-Corp, respectively, with a freemium business model (free reports with a premium enhanced reports) and the interesting claim of "possibly 10,000" of what are described as "unaffiliated or unregistered members", along with "1000" of what are described as "Registered clients". I've no idea how this particular structure ever could have met the ALAC certification criteria. BC membership, reasonably, but ALS requires due diligence by ICANN Staff which "could include, without limitation, ... requiring the applicant to demonstrate the identity of their individual constituents." This isn't to say the Bruen brothers businesses don't do good things, but it is odd to construe the enablement, participation and membership criteria (1, 2 and 4 of the minimum criteria for an At-Large Structure) as something that could possibly be met by two legal persons, whether siblings or private benefit corporations. This just happened to also catch my eye -- the latest statistics for the web405 website (recall the enablement, participation and membership criteria) is from November, 2007. I have a preference for eligible candidates, and for eligible electors. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
At 01/06/2013 01:20 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
On 5/31/13 7:49 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will oversee the process.
As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating that he/she meet the following criteria:
- be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list; - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the North American region as defined by ICANN; - not be a member of a certified ALS.
Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes a NARALO ALS).
I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS, is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status.
Thank you Alan. This is Rule 17.
ISOC Chapters come and go. A former co-worker at CORE has been starting a chapter in Norway, where a chapter existed, became moribund, and finally was dissolved. At Large Structure certifications come and go also.
The 2007 MoU establishing NARALO contains this decertification responsibility:
5. "Agreed Responsiblities of the NARALO" ... f) "Providing advice to the ICANN At Large Advisory Committee about the certification and, if necessary, decertification of different ALSs and the use of outreach and communication tool across the region."
EURALO has a draft decertification procedure document. LACRALO and AFRALO have published substantive criteria. The NARALO criteria is tied only to "voting", and so capable of being met by a single person representing him or her self as an organization.
For instance, the Canadian Association for Open Source appears quiessent, Peter Salus stopped blogging there in 2006, Bill Traynor in 2007, Evan Liebovitch in 2008, with only Russell McOrmond continuing to January, 2012. No "recent posts" reflected in its log for the past twelve months, three only in the past twenty four months, six only, and all by the same person, for the past 36 months.
I've no idea how this particular structure continues to meet the ALAC certification criteria.
Another peculiarity is Knujon, which appears to be two persons, Garth and Robert Bruen, principals of a Massachusetts LLC and a Vermont S-Corp, respectively, with a freemium business model (free reports with a premium enhanced reports) and the interesting claim of "possibly 10,000" of what are described as "unaffiliated or unregistered members", along with "1000" of what are described as "Registered clients".
I've no idea how this particular structure ever could have met the ALAC certification criteria. BC membership, reasonably, but ALS requires due diligence by ICANN Staff which "could include, without limitation, ... requiring the applicant to demonstrate the identity of their individual constituents."
This isn't to say the Bruen brothers businesses don't do good things, but it is odd to construe the enablement, participation and membership criteria (1, 2 and 4 of the minimum criteria for an At-Large Structure) as something that could possibly be met by two legal persons, whether siblings or private benefit corporations.
This just happened to also catch my eye -- the latest statistics for the web405 website (recall the enablement, participation and membership criteria) is from November, 2007.
I have a preference for eligible candidates, and for eligible electors.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
I will not comment on the specific cases, but I have said many times in many fora that we need to make sure that our (ie ICANN`s) ALSs are indeed viable according to our rules of participation. Moreover, it is probably timely to review those rules and make sure they satisfy today`s needs, or modify them accordingly. Alan
Alan: Very good suggestion. We should bring up this item in the next NARALO conference call (if not before). -ed On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>wrote:
At 01/06/2013 01:20 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
On 5/31/13 7:49 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will oversee the process.
As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating that he/she meet the following criteria:
- be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list; - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the North American region as defined by ICANN; - not be a member of a certified ALS.
Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes a NARALO ALS).
I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS, is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status.
Thank you Alan. This is Rule 17.
ISOC Chapters come and go. A former co-worker at CORE has been starting a chapter in Norway, where a chapter existed, became moribund, and finally was dissolved. At Large Structure certifications come and go also.
The 2007 MoU establishing NARALO contains this decertification responsibility:
5. "Agreed Responsiblities of the NARALO" ... f) "Providing advice to the ICANN At Large Advisory Committee about the certification and, if necessary, decertification of different ALSs and the use of outreach and communication tool across the region."
EURALO has a draft decertification procedure document. LACRALO and AFRALO have published substantive criteria. The NARALO criteria is tied only to "voting", and so capable of being met by a single person representing him or her self as an organization.
For instance, the Canadian Association for Open Source appears quiessent, Peter Salus stopped blogging there in 2006, Bill Traynor in 2007, Evan Liebovitch in 2008, with only Russell McOrmond continuing to January, 2012. No "recent posts" reflected in its log for the past twelve months, three only in the past twenty four months, six only, and all by the same person, for the past 36 months.
I've no idea how this particular structure continues to meet the ALAC certification criteria.
Another peculiarity is Knujon, which appears to be two persons, Garth and Robert Bruen, principals of a Massachusetts LLC and a Vermont S-Corp, respectively, with a freemium business model (free reports with a premium enhanced reports) and the interesting claim of "possibly 10,000" of what are described as "unaffiliated or unregistered members", along with "1000" of what are described as "Registered clients".
I've no idea how this particular structure ever could have met the ALAC certification criteria. BC membership, reasonably, but ALS requires due diligence by ICANN Staff which "could include, without limitation, ... requiring the applicant to demonstrate the identity of their individual constituents."
This isn't to say the Bruen brothers businesses don't do good things, but it is odd to construe the enablement, participation and membership criteria (1, 2 and 4 of the minimum criteria for an At-Large Structure) as something that could possibly be met by two legal persons, whether siblings or private benefit corporations.
This just happened to also catch my eye -- the latest statistics for the web405 website (recall the enablement, participation and membership criteria) is from November, 2007.
I have a preference for eligible candidates, and for eligible electors.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
I will not comment on the specific cases, but I have said many times in many fora that we need to make sure that our (ie ICANN`s) ALSs are indeed viable according to our rules of participation.
Moreover, it is probably timely to review those rules and make sure they satisfy today`s needs, or modify them accordingly.
Alan
------ 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 ------
-- *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately.
Alan, Eduardo,
I will not comment on the specific cases ...
I picked two cases because I presume that each "ALS" has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in an election (the nuance here being that where "rough consensus" is allowed there may be no act for which any test of eligibility exists). I've no idea if the third example has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in a recent election.
We should bring up this item in the next NARALO conference call (if not before).
I'll write Staff as the original, and enduring due diligence duty stated in the 2007 MoU at 5 f), lies there. I'm not concerned if, in the hypothetical "worst case", all current ALSs are decertified, as the 2007 MoA creates both ALSs memberships and Unaffiliated memberships, so the RALO will continue to exist, independent of any certification review outcome or the voluntary surrenders of ALS memberships. I certainly hope this will not be the outcome, if only because I would prefer there exist, not just the theory of user groups organized to answer the conditions of the 2007 MoU, but at least one example of that in fact. Whether addressing the question of ALS decertification yields an outcome from Staff procedure or from RALO procedure. or both, eligibility to vote in the 2013 elections for the MoA 5 g) roles may be determined before, or after, the election results are adopted by the NARALO General Assembly. Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
Every few years we go through this distraction. Someone - and usually someone who is not themselves otherwise putting any effort into in at-large - goes on an "investigative" spree and whines about ALSs that shouldn't be. Let's remember that outreach and community building is still a challenge within ICANN; we ought to be quick to accept and slow to discharge. We certainly need to decertify truly dormant ALSs as a matter of keeping quorum, but there is too much real work to be done on ICANN policy to spend our volunteer time engaging in inquisitions. An active and engaged ALS with five members is preferable to a silent one of a hundred. - Evan (via mobile) On 2013-06-01 2:53 PM, "Eric Brunner-Williams" <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
Alan, Eduardo,
I will not comment on the specific cases ...
I picked two cases because I presume that each "ALS" has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in an election (the nuance here being that where "rough consensus" is allowed there may be no act for which any test of eligibility exists).
I've no idea if the third example has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in a recent election.
We should bring up this item in the next NARALO conference call (if not before).
I'll write Staff as the original, and enduring due diligence duty stated in the 2007 MoU at 5 f), lies there. I'm not concerned if, in the hypothetical "worst case", all current ALSs are decertified, as the 2007 MoA creates both ALSs memberships and Unaffiliated memberships, so the RALO will continue to exist, independent of any certification review outcome or the voluntary surrenders of ALS memberships. I certainly hope this will not be the outcome, if only because I would prefer there exist, not just the theory of user groups organized to answer the conditions of the 2007 MoU, but at least one example of that in fact.
Whether addressing the question of ALS decertification yields an outcome from Staff procedure or from RALO procedure. or both, eligibility to vote in the 2013 elections for the MoA 5 g) roles may be determined before, or after, the election results are adopted by the NARALO General Assembly.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
------ 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 ------
It is also worthwhile to note that active status of an ALS is not tied strictly to voting as has been claimed below. Rule 16 of our Operating Principles clearly state, "...when an ALS representative does not vote in three consecutive NARALO elections OR does not contribute a comment on ICANN policy through collaboration on the At Large discussion lists in 12 consecutive months...". So, voting is most certainly not the only criteria, nor should it be. Darlene A. Thompson CAP Administrator N-CAP/Department of Education P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 dthompson@gov.nu.ca ________________________________________ From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] on behalf of Evan Leibovitch [evan@telly.org] Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2013 3:52 PM To: NARALO Discussion List Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Ramping up for the election - General Procedures Every few years we go through this distraction. Someone - and usually someone who is not themselves otherwise putting any effort into in at-large - goes on an "investigative" spree and whines about ALSs that shouldn't be. Let's remember that outreach and community building is still a challenge within ICANN; we ought to be quick to accept and slow to discharge. We certainly need to decertify truly dormant ALSs as a matter of keeping quorum, but there is too much real work to be done on ICANN policy to spend our volunteer time engaging in inquisitions. An active and engaged ALS with five members is preferable to a silent one of a hundred. - Evan (via mobile) On 2013-06-01 2:53 PM, "Eric Brunner-Williams" <ebw@abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:
Alan, Eduardo,
I will not comment on the specific cases ...
I picked two cases because I presume that each "ALS" has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in an election (the nuance here being that where "rough consensus" is allowed there may be no act for which any test of eligibility exists).
I've no idea if the third example has represented itself as a qualified elector and has cast a ballot of record in a recent election.
We should bring up this item in the next NARALO conference call (if not before).
I'll write Staff as the original, and enduring due diligence duty stated in the 2007 MoU at 5 f), lies there. I'm not concerned if, in the hypothetical "worst case", all current ALSs are decertified, as the 2007 MoA creates both ALSs memberships and Unaffiliated memberships, so the RALO will continue to exist, independent of any certification review outcome or the voluntary surrenders of ALS memberships. I certainly hope this will not be the outcome, if only because I would prefer there exist, not just the theory of user groups organized to answer the conditions of the 2007 MoU, but at least one example of that in fact.
Whether addressing the question of ALS decertification yields an outcome from Staff procedure or from RALO procedure. or both, eligibility to vote in the 2013 elections for the MoA 5 g) roles may be determined before, or after, the election results are adopted by the NARALO General Assembly.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
------ 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 ------
participants (5)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Eduardo Diaz -
Eric Brunner-Williams -
Evan Leibovitch -
Thompson, Darlene