Re: [icann-eu] Re: [members-meeting] LAST CALL: Study Committee Comments.

[Alexander Svensson <svensson@icannchannel.de>]

Dear Barbara,

some comments on some points of your proposals:

Barbara Simons <simons@acm.org> wrote:
> 3.  In point 2 you say, " The recent At Large    elections
> have produced the strong public expectation that the At
> Large directors will be elected, and that at least five of them
> continue to be elected directly."
>
> No, no, no!!!  Please don't ever say this.  Once such a
> sentence comes out of people who could be viewed as
> representatives of the at large community, we will have
> NO MORE than five elected at large directors - and most
> likely no more than five at large directors, elected or not.

I'm not sure whether this is a question of wording or not:

 The recent At Large elections have produced the strong public 
 expectation that *ALL NINE* At Large directors will be elected, 
 and that at least five of them continue to be elected directly.
This is what is meant, maybe this would make it more clear.

> 5.  You begin point 3.1 with, "We agree with the ICANN staff that..."
> I don't agree with the Board about anything relating to the study,
> aside from the obvious point that we should improve the methodology
> used for registration, nominations, and voting. I believe we need to
> be very clear that we consider any study that considers elimination
> of some or all of the at large seats to be unacceptable.

The point 3.1 is about the size and efficiency, not about
the goals. In general, you want to emphasize that cutting 
down the At Large representation is unacceptable to us --
a point on which I think there is consensus among all the
list participants. Maybe this point (which is included in
section 2, albeit in a more restrained way) should be in 
the introduction as well, so that it cannot be missed.

Best,
/// Alexander