[atlarge-discuss] Re: [atlarge-panel] elections

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

Given that time constraints preclude any messing around, I suggest a slight
flexibility/redundancy is added to the election process in the form of the
election of an organization that can, from the outset, accommodate a working
structure for two separate and distinct functions - A). A Group to work
inside the ICANN ALAC using top-down guidance from ICANN Board and Nom-Com
appointees such as Denise Michele, and B) the other group, a separate and
wholly external [to ICANN] lobbying group, whose very existence is not
dependant upon ICANN Board's benevolence or lack of it thereof, which will
be guided solely by a mandate derived from a bottom-up consensus development
process, based on democratic principals of open working groups, elections
and one man one vote.

My thinking is this:-

Today, we witnessed Jamie Love express very clearly and forcefully the very
deep concerns of many individuals from the user community who could not
attend in person and speak for themselves in the Public Forum at Bucharest.
Such a position is unworkable within the current Board thinking about a
top-down ALAC. For me, Jamie represents the voice of reason at this time.
Others may disagree, including Vittorio and Izumi, whose tacit approval of
an ICANN ALAC concept, albeit misguided in my view, also has some support.
What is clear from both these efforts is that the fledgling IcannAtLarge.com
*must* accommodate a range of possibly conflicting strategies to make
substantive progress possible on *both* fronts, or the effort as a whole
will divide, weaken or worse, become completely blocked.

The best way I can think of to avoid this is:-

1. ELECTIONS - SUGGESTION:- Increase the number of elected representatives
to 10 or 14, and constitute two panels of 5 or 7 each, with a single neutral
Chair who primary role is to liaise between the two panels and uncover
possible areas of consensus. The membership can then move between the two,
or follow both, as they see fit on various issues, and other groups may
eventually form from those initial two. The difference between this and the
constituency model is there is no predestined groups or number of groups -
they form naturally from like-minded people getting together. Also, the
voting mechanism used is ONE PERSON, ONE VOTE  - regardless of how many
groups one may or may not join ultimately.

One problem with working within ICANN's ever moving goal posts is that
ICANN's Bylaws currently do not allow a person to be appointed as an officer
of more than one SO, (which may change), but at this time it is would not be
prudent for YJ Park (not wishing to single her out - just an example) to
take on an active role to represent this organization in an ICANN ALAC
forum, while she remains active in the DNSO NC. There are many who would
object to excluding anybody from the process, However, under the "two small
panel" scenario, a person would not be precluded from taking up a position
(if duly elected) on an At Large Panel tasked with dealing with issues that
do not directly deal with ICANN - for example on Outreach/ multi-lingual
issues and so on. This is a more effective way of dealing with conflict of
interest than the previous "honor system" which doesn't work.

2. SUGGESTION - NAME OF ORGANIZATION: [ICANN]ATLARGE.COM but incorporating
Opt-in/ Opt-out, meaning the reference to [ICANN] may be dropped from time
to time as appropriate, so that in certain venues where long complicated
historical details are not a factor, the organization would be known simply
as ATLARGE.COM. Examples where this might occur would be outreach efforts to
recruit new members, PR activities, dealings with the mainstream media,
situations where we are riding on our own organization's reputation, not
ICANN's - or in situations when there is unanimous opposition to a published
ICANN Board position, and a certain distance is desirable. It's a flexible
arrangement that will allow a fresh approach to a range of new activities,
those that ICANN has failed at miserably - including but not limited to
setting up a bank account, obtaining 501 (c) 3 status independently of
ICANN, allowing for separate funding applications to be made of Markle, -
while equally, allowing the organization to retain the [ICANN]ATLARGE.COM
branding for recognition and continuity purposes within the ICANN Community,
where it is already well known, particularly within what will be the ALAC
forum. Contributions can then be made to specific group activities by the
donor - [ICANN]AtLarge.com (possibly through ICANN's account for the ALAC) -
or to a separate bank account set up for AtLarge.com.


3. ELECTION TIMELINE:- Danny is right. There are minimum guidelines that
affect the credibility of the results and I insist they are deviated to such
an extent so as to affect trust in the system used. I have another condition
to impose on my involvement, related to Watchdogs, which I hope can be
accommodated without any great difficulty, but given the traumatic news
Elizabeth received today about the loss of a dear colleague, Peter de Blanc,
I respectfully set aside detailed discussion of all aspects that inevitably
concern her at this difficult time. It can wait a day or so.

Regards,
Joanna







---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de