Sorry for being silent last few days, but busy with other things, and it
took me some time to read all the related mails.
There is a strong confusion between our urgent task of revising the
charter and the next election round for KK replacement.
1) ELECTION
First try to eliminate the second question to work on the first
one. From what I read in all mails, I found Vany's second proposal the
most appropriate.
The vote is both to replace a NC rep and an AdCom member. The procedure
(and the interest) should be similar (whereas I can imagine that, if Vany
or myself had resigned from the AdCom, instead of KK from AdCom AND NC,
debate would have been less active).
Keeping in mind that:
-- geographical diversity needs to be respected
-- NC rep are the members of the AdCom who got the highest three voting
result
Vany's second proposal looks OK. In the three regions not represented in
the NC, two must have as candidate their actual adcom member, who did run
already for a NC position (rather than for only an AdCom position). The
last constituency could have any candidate. Then the vote will be for the
NC seat. The highest score wins. The other two highest scores (respecting
the geographical diversity) will take (or keep) the two AdCom seats.
In case of one of the two Adcom member (Vany or myself to-day), doesn't
want to be candidate for the NC, he should be prepared to be kicked-off by
someone from the same region getting more votes than him. That is fair
since he has no mandate to prevent his region from having a NC rep!
2) CHARTER
2-1- ALTERNATE
There are several points to improve, among them the alternate problem
still raises some controversy.
* It is certainly useful for a NC rep to have a substitute to attend a
meeting or a tele-conf when he cannot attend it himself. But after
attending a NC conference call to-day, I noticed that other constituencies
afford easily to have not all NC rep participating (even through proxies).
* It is not in the spirit of the ICANN by-laws (neither in the text
itself) to have elected alternate(s). I have checked that also on the ASO
side.
* The constituency, because of its diversity and its variety in points of
view, needs to have an active and efficient Adcom to run it. The Alternate
scheme would weaken the role of the AdCom, which is not desirable.
Therefore I am in favor of not having two-names votes. Milton
advocates that the candidate knows the person proposed as vice-rep. I
think that a two-name vote can affect significantly the result of the
vote, either by making a difference between those proposing an alternate
and those running alone, or by diminushing the score of a candidate of
whom the alternate provokes some rejection vote. In any case, the vote
itself is not so clear because of that.
For the replacement of any member of the AdCom or NC rep, we should agree
to have an election. The interim period of the NC seat is taken by the
first non-NC AdCom member, for the interim period before the election.
2-2- Geographical diversity
ICANN starts thinking to have more than 5 geographical regions (Middle
East countries did raise the problem I guess). may be we should adapt the
terms of the charter by replacing the "5" by "the number of geographical
regions". That would not affect the NC rep, but would leave room for a
fully complete representation in the AdCom.
An other notion which is not clear, is that any member of a region is free
to vote for any candidate for an election, i.e. he can vote also for
candidate of other regions. That can impact significantly the results of a
vote for only some of the regions reps.
2-3- Political party membership
That seems to me terribly difficult to verify whether a political party is
acting or not as a gov or similar level. Unless knowing perfectly well the
political situation of all countries, I bet we will never be able to
distinguish what they are doing (with respect to the NCDNHC eligibility).
We must therefore accept of reject all of them. My feeling would be to
accept them (but on a personal point of view, I will have difficulty to
support the application of some extreme party).
Same problem may arise in the future with religious organizations.
-
Regards
Dany
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dany VANDROMME | Directeur du GIP RENATER
Reseau National de Telecommunications
pour la Technologie, l'Enseignement et la Recherche
| ENSAM
Tel : +33 (0)1 53 94 20 30 | 151 Boulevard de l'Hopital
Fax : +33 (0)1 53 94 20 31 | 75013 Paris
E-mail: Dany.Vandromme@renater.fr | FRANCE
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 17 2000 - 09:39:07 PDT