[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[registrars] Elections to NC; some issues

Hi all,

Well, back to work ;-) After a looong week under the influence of
real-world viurses I have some urgent questions prior to the next
Names Council teleconference.

First of all, as Michael has already pointed, out, we are to run new
elections in order to select threee new NC reps. 

The schedule proposed by ICANN is attached  below, with some comments
ofe initialized as [AAA: ]:

     9/15 Deadline for amended constituency proposals to be submitted to

[AAA: as discussed at Santiago, there are no urgent need for changes.
Perhaps enshirning Robert's rules of order into the Articles, but even
this is far form clear, as we tend to use "simplified" versions. Not a
big deal, btw. But see below...]

     9/19 Final recognition: Board teleconference to approve and recognize
     amended constituency proposals

     10/8 Deadline for constituencies to elect Names Council members

[AAA: I guess Michael is preparing the electoral process, as discussed
in Santiago. In order to avoid some suprises as we experienced during
last election, I suggest that anyone nominating a candidate takes the
responsibility to obtain the nominee's assent or his/her declination.
As alwyas, I perssonally encourage self-nominatios as they solve this
and many other porblems, except aesthetics ;-) ]

[AAA: Michael,m what are the current expectations regarding the elections?]

     10/16 Deadline for Names Council selection of ICANN Board members

[AAA: This is why a new Names Council, beyond the current porvisional
one, has to be elected. The "new" NC has to be in place in order to
elect the three DNSO Directors]


Regarding the NC elections, as i said, our secretariat is surely
comleting the time schedule and process. Regarding the DNSO Directors,
I would suggest that we should start thinking who are we going to
support, individually or collectively.

Nominations might come form any group of individuals (probably 10) or
any constituency. Remember that the selection will be difficult: one
one side,each Director must be a citizen of a country in a differebnt
region. OTOH, DNSO should not select more than one rep fomr a given
constituency.... (the former is in the Byalws; the latter is simply a
strtategic truth).

We should consider whether we want to nominate someone form the
constituency itself (having its "offical suppport") or not. I am not
completly sure whether this is a good or bad idea. But we should be
active in the nomination process, and in monitoring the nominees in
order to ascertan whcih combination is more acceptable to us as a
group. Given the "regional diversity" rule, we should better identify
a set of "good" candidates in at least two, if not three, regions.

Nominees to the Board can be NC members. I guess that many of the
strongest candidates will in fct seat in the NC we are going to elect
during this month. But the Board, and the current NC is of the clear
opinion that anyone form the NC gets selceted as a DNSP Director to
ICANN, then he/she should immediately resign. I suggest that we ask
this personal commitment to all of our NC cnadidates, as theis "clear
view" is not clearly stated in the current Bylaws.

Ah, and regarding the Bylaws, we do havbe a serious problem regarding
NC elections. See next mail for more detail....