Re: [alac] Re: [alac-admin] Re: Long but important, and action needed: Selecting the 2006 ICANN Nominating Committee

[ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel <michel@xxxxxxxxx>]

Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> Wendy Seltzer ha scritto:
>
> > This timeline sounds as though it is too short for ALAC to get 
> > meaningful participation from the numerous geographically diverse 
> > groups it is supposed to represent.  I can't see any way we could get 
> > input from the at-large and appoint nomcomm members in time for people 
> > from remote regions to arrange for travel to Vancouver in less than a 
> > month.  In that case, starting meetings in Vancouver will marginalize 
> > at-large input from the start.
>
>
> I agree with you. Let's hear from other members, but if we all agree, I 
> will reply to the note by pointing this out.
>
> > Can we hear from ALAC's other previous nomcomm appointees to see if 
> > they agree with Bret that there is no need to start the process this 
> > early?
>
>
> Actually, they (at least one of them) already wrote us one week ago or 
> so, warning that this might happen - this is why we already started to 
> discuss this in our last conf call and then started the selection 
> process. It seemed to me that they were somewhat favourable to this 
> advance start.
>
> In any case, I would proceed on our own plan - I would ask for 
> statements of interest by, say, 15 days from now (22 November?), and try 
> to agree on the selections by/in Vancouver, using the few days in the 
> middle for a first assessment and verification on nominees.

Deciding on At-Large delegates in Vancouver will most likely result in 
the At-Large delegates not being involved in the  first 2006 NomCom 
meeting.  Is this an acceptable outcome?

While I appreciate the fact that the NomCom Chair feels that "The 
current schedule under which the NomCom operates is stressful and risks 
not providing sufficient time for adequate information to be gathered 
for a thorough candidate assessment," couldn't the same now be said by 
the ALAC as a result of the unrealistic time frame that was just announced?

In addition, the NomCom Chair notes that part of the reasoning behind 
this new time frame is that a majority of those chosen for the 2006 
NomCom will very likely attend the Vancouver meeting.  Clearly, 
attending the Vancouver ICANN meeting is not a prerequisite for an 
At-Large NomCom delegate.  Should it be?

If it was, wouldn't that run counter to the stated NomCom membership 
goals?  "...To achieve this broad public-interest orientation, the 
membership of the Nominating Committee is drawn from across the ICANN 
and global Internet communities, on the theory that a Nominating 
Committee consisting of independent delegates of widely varying 
backgrounds and interests will, by the imperative of consensus, be able 
to produce slates of outstanding, highly-qualified, well-respected, and 
diverse nominees." 
<http://www.icann.org/committees/nom-comm/nc2005/faqs.htm>

Denise
michel@xxxxxxxxx