Re: [icann-eu] Draft comments on Study Committee

[Marc Schneiders <marc@schneiders.org>]

On Tue, 21 Nov 2000, at 19:35 [=GMT+0100], Thomas Roessler wrote:
> On 2000-11-21 19:15:25 +0100, Marc Schneiders wrote:
> 
> > Ad 1: May I suggest adding a few words that indicate that what is
> > suggested is "keeping the original role of At Large", as promised
> > by ICANN (which was part of the 'deal' in its establishment)?
> 
> That sounds like a good idea.  However, I'll have to have another
> look at the white paper in order to properly phrase such a section.
> If you want to save me that time, a proposition would be highly
> welcome.

If I read it correctly (and slowly enough), the white paper
(http://www.icann.org/general/white-paper-05jun98.htm) has one
relevant paragraph (in the 'revised policy statement' part,
unnumbered):

"
As outlined in appropriate organizational documents, (Charter, Bylaws,
etc.) the new corporation should: 

[...]

2) direct the Interim Board to establish a system for electing a Board
of Directors for the new corporation that insures that the new
corporation's Board of Directors reflects the geographical and
functional diversity of the Internet, and is sufficiently flexible to
permit evolution to reflect changes in the constituency of Internet
stakeholders. Nominations to the Board of Directors should preserve,
as much as possible, the tradition of bottom-up governance of the
Internet, and Board Members should be elected from membership or other
associations open to all or through other mechanisms that ensure broad
representation and participation in the election process. 

[...]
"

"Board Members should be elected from membership or other associations
open to all" is what we could focus on, though people might invoke
the next half sentence to let this disappear. If I read it correctly,
it does say that in any case there must be directors that are elected
by users. Only the process is open, not the result.

How about:

  It is essential to adhere to a principal policy of the white
  paper, which clearly states that "Board Members...open to all". If
  this is to be replaced by some other mechanism, this must be, as the
  white paper suggest, an "election process" in which everyone
  involved can vote. [Follows: what Thomas wrote about not limitimg to
  only "input"]

-- 
Marc Schneiders (rest in header)