[alac] Re: [alac-admin] Pending ALAC administrative changes

[Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I agree with the substance of the change, but I wonder if it's 
procedurally worthwhile, given the effort to change a bylaw that 
won't make significant difference once changed (i.e., it makes little 
difference to ICANN power structures whether we approve none or all 
of the few ALSs who apply -- none of them has any power).   If we 
have a limited amount of Board attention, wouldn't we be better off 
spending it asking for more significant changes to the way ALAC works 
and influences ICANN?

--Wendy


At 07:11 PM 9/23/2005, ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel wrote:
> * Changing voting requirements for ALS certification:
>
> Per the ALAC's discussions, the following bylaw change is proposed 
> regarding ALS certification.  Bylaw changes must be posted for 
> public comment for 21 days and then approved by ICANN's 
> Board.  ICANN's legal counsel has been asked to expedite action on 
> this. Prior to Board consideration, I'll draft a staff paper on the 
> proposed change.  It would be useful to include in the paper the 
> ALAC's voting procedures. Based on email discussion thus far, they 
> would be:  ALAC chair calls a vote on an ALS application; at least 7 
> calendar days will be provided for ALAC members to cast their vote, 
> and appropriate online means will be used to allow remote 
> participation in the vote.
>
> Please let me know if you have more/different suggestions for the 
> ALAC's voting guidelines or any further comments on voting.
>
> http://icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/bylaws-08apr05.htm#XI
>
> Section 2, paragraph 4(i):
> ...  Decisions to certify or de-certify an At-Large Structure shall 
> require a 2/3 vote of all of the members of the ALAC and shall be 
> subject to review according to procedures established by the Board. .....
>
> Replace with:
> Decisions to certify or de-certify an At-Large Structure shall 
> require a 2/3 majority among all of the members of the ALAC who cast 
> a vote, provided at least 9 members of the ALAC cast a vote 
> according to procedures adopted by the Committee. These decisions 
> shall be subject to review according to procedures established by the Board."
>
> * Stiall awaiting ALAC action is:
>
> - Establishing minimum participation requirements for ALAC members
> - Establishing new ALAC role descriptions and options
>
> ALAC members were to make proposals on these via email for 
> consideration/finalization in Vancouver.
>
> Deise
> michel@xxxxxxxxx

--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/