Re: [gnso-consensus-wg] Updated Draft
Although the term "At-Large" is being used in its correct non-ICANN meaning, within ICANN, "At-Large" has a very specific meaning related to the structured pyramid below the ALAC. Using it in this context is just demanding that people misunderstand. And in fact, all three NomCom appointees are At-Large according to the general definition. Also, in 4.g.i and 4.g.ii the word Council should be replaced by House.I cannot think of any elegant way to identify the various NomCom appointees, but for place-holders, how about:
User House NomCom Appointee
Contracted Parties NomCom Appoinee and
Council-level NomCom Appointee
Lastly, I am increasingly uncomfortable with the 75% of one house
threshold to remove a NomCom appointee. This is a perfect setup for
some future House to decide their NomCom appointee is too
obstreperous, and decide to remove them (and with no viable way of a
replacement being selecting in a reasonable time-frame). Given how
receptive much of this WG has been to the idea of NomCom appointees,
this simply does not have a good feel to it. I suggest that 1/2 of
the other house must support removal as well.
Alan At 24/07/2008 09:32 PM, Nevett, Jonathon wrote: iii. 1 At-Large Nominating Committee Appointee
|