[ICANN-EU] RE: prefered access for ICANN nominees

["Andrew McLaughlin" <ajm@icann.org>]

It seems we're not communicating properly here.  As with nearly any
corporation or society (in the Internet context, consider the IETF, ISOC,
ARIN, etc.), the Nominating Committee is asked to perform the function of
screening and recruiting potential candidates and to put forward a set of
names for the ballot.  In addition, candidates that were not chosen by the
Nominating Committee have the ability to get onto the ballot by
demonstrating a minimum threshold of support through an open call to the
membership for endorsements.

You seem to be unhappy about the role given to the Nominating Committee, but
it's actually a very standard mechanism.

--Andrew


[ -----Original Message-----
[ From: Andreas Fügner [mailto:Andreas.Fuegner@lizenz.com]
[ Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 3:22 PM
[ To: ajm@icann.org
[ Cc: icann-europe@fitug.de
[ Subject: Re: prefered access for ICANN nominees
[ 
[ 
[ Dear Andrew:
[ 
[ Thanks for your prompt attention and reply.
[ 
[ > to nominate five or more candidates for consideration by the
[ > At Large membership for selection to the ICANN Board.
[ 
[ This would be fullfilled, if the ICANN nominated candidates,
[ were now competing for the 7 places on the ballot
[ as the member nominated candidates are.
[ 
[ So why the unequal procedure?
[ 
[ Thanks again and best regards,
[ 
[ Andreas Fuegner
[ 
[ 
[ 
[ 
[ >Dear Andreas:
[ >
[ >Take a look at the Cairo resolutions, which did the following:
[ >
[ >"3. Establish a Nominating Committee consisting of members 
[ appointed by the
[ >Board to accept recommendations and nominations from the 
[ Internet community
[ >as a whole, and to nominate five or more candidates for consideration by
[ the
[ >At Large membership for selection to the ICANN Board;"
[ >
[ >"4. Establish a petition process for additional nominations from the At
[ >Large membership that meet certain minimum qualifying criteria; ..."
[ >
[ ><http://www.icann.org/minutes/minutes-10mar00.htm#AtLargeMembership>
[ >
[ >There are therefore two ways to appear on the ballot:  (1) be 
[ nominated by
[ >the Nominating Committee, or (2) through member-nomination meet minimum
[ >support criteria (i.e., 2% of the activated members in the region).
[ >
[ >That was the consensus compromise achieved in Cairo.
[ >
[ >Best regards,
[ >
[ >--Andrew
[ >
[ >     -------------------------------------------------------------------
[ >andrew mclaughlin           |    chief policy officer & cfo
[ >internet corporation for assigned names and numbers
[ ><mclaughlin@icann.org>  |     <http://www.icann.org>
[ >     -------------------------------------------------------------------
[ >
[ >
[ >
[ >-----Original Message-----
[ >From: Andreas Fügner [mailto:Andreas.Fuegner@lizenz.com]
[ >Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2000 7:36 AM
[ >To: election@icann.org
[ >Subject: prefered access for ICANN nominees
[ >
[ >
[ >Dear Madam or Sir:
[ >
[ >I am desperately trying to find out,  when and by whom the decision was
[ >made,
[ >that the candidates nominated by the nomination committee will have a
[ >guaranteed
[ >place on the ballot and, thus, will be preferred over member nominated
[ >candidates.
[ >
[ >Could you please help me here?
[ >
[ >Many thanks in advance for this matter and all your work so far!
[ >
[ >Best regards,
[ >
[ >Andreas Fuegner
[ >
[ >
[ >
[ 
[