ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [alac] Selecting Our Successors

  • To: Bret Fausett <bfausett@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [alac] Selecting Our Successors
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 23:19:29 -0500

Interesting, but when you take away even the modicum of direct control that people might appear to have, what's the point?


At 07:01 PM 1/25/2006, Bret Fausett wrote:
I've been giving some thought to the creation of the RALOs and how they will select our successors. After a lot of consideration, I've come to the conclusion that "voting" will create levels of complexity and bureaucracy that will be detrimental to the RALO-ALAC effort. The problem of how to weight and count votes of different organizations, with differing membership structures, while preventing capture of the regional ALAC seats, is not easily solvable. I can't think of any light-weight, objective mechanism for addressing the problems with votes.

Accordingly, I'd like to propose the following for discussion:

(1) The ALSs propose a willing person or persons from their region to sit on the ALAC, forward an application containing the person's relevant background to the other ALSs, and then discuss the names on a private RALO mailing list. If they agree on the person or persons who should fill the open seat(s), they send the names to ICANN, which appoints them to the ALAC.

(2) If they don't agree on the person or persons who should fill the open seat(s), they send the names under discussion, with their applications, to the ICANN Nominating Committee. With the submission to the NomComm, the RALO indicates which ALSs support which persons. The Nominating Committee is provided background information on each of the ALSs, including its mission, organization, and size of the membership. The Nominating Committee must select someone from the list provided by the RALO.

That's it. No voting, and we build on existing structures rather than create a new voting structure or procedure. I think it would work well. Let me know your thoughts.


Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy