ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

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

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

  • To: Interim ALAC <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [alac] Re: [alac-admin] Re: Long but important, and action needed: Selecting the 2006 ICANN Nominating Committee
  • From: ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel <michel@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2005 15:31:34 -0800

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>


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

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy