[governance] Reinstate the Vote

[Jacqueline A. Morris]

Hi Danny
I miss how this will be much more representative - drawn from the pool of
candidates who previously stood for At large election? How are these people
representative of individual internet users in Lopinot in Trinidad for
example (who didn't hear at all about the election in 2000 and as such were
disenfranchised)? And how are they drawn?
And yes, I read the full document. 
Jacqueline

-----Original Message-----
From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2007 21:07
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Kieren McCarthy
Subject: RE: [governance] Reinstate the Vote

Kieren,

You know, you really should make an effort to read the
public comments submitted once in a while...

I earlier proposed a "solution" within the public
comment submitted at this URL:  
http://forum.icann.org/lists/naralo-comments/msg00006.html

Here's the gist of it:

A readily-implemented, low-cost solution to seat
at-large directors on the ICANN board.

The solution:

Those directors that are not currently elected by
ICANN’s Supporting Organizations come to the board by
way of ICANN’s “Nominating Committee”, a body
populated exclusively by special-interest
representatives.

This committee must be eliminated and must be replaced
by a new committee populated exclusively by
public-interest representatives.  These
representatives will be drawn from the pool of
candidates that previously stood for at-large
election.  These voices of the public will then,
through the same set of processes used by the current
Nominating Committee, select the slate of at-large
directors that will take their seats on the ICANN
board (and ICANN will thereby finally come to honor
the principle of balanced representation).

By the way, I see nothing wrong with the notion of the
Chairman asking "So how do we fix this?".  Prior
Boards chose to put together blue-ribbon panels to
study an issue (like Carl Bildt's ALSC that arrived at
a consensus-based recommendation to have the at-large
seated on one third of the Board).  Unfortunately, we
have been blessed with boards whose wisdom is superior
to that of the commmunity and who feel quite
comfortable rejecting consensus-based determinations.

Who knows... perhaps one day you might be heralded as
the ICANN Manager of Public Representation instead of
as a functionary that is charged with pushing the
prospect of feeble "participation" onto those that
instead are screaming for accountability via true
multistakeholder representation.  Time will tell.

best wishes,
and again thanks for your perspective.


--- Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com> wrote:

> I understand where you're coming from Danny. But you
> asked me what the best
> method was and that's the answer.
> 
> What you are assuming, wrongly in my view, is that
> participation within
> those structures won't work. I don't agree. I think
> it will work. Moreover
> what I am saying is that *unless* people participate
> in those structures,
> there won't be change along the lines you suggested.
> 
> If you have other suggestions that could practically
> work please throw them
> in. 
> 
> The problem with your suggestion of writing letters
> to the chairman is that
> the chairman will then ask: "So how do we fix this?"
> and we end up in the
> exact same place that we are now.
> 
> Now if you could present a clear case as to why such
> a change would be in
> ICANN's overall interests AND provide a number of
> suggested routes for
> getting there, then I think you'd find he would
> start looking at it
> seriously. If that whole case was to come from
> within the ICANN structure,
> it would add further weight.
> 
> But to send a letter saying "this isn't right" and
> offering no solution is
> not going to achieve much.
> 
> Just my two cents.
> 
> I should also say that if people do participate in
> ICANN's processes they
> not only benefit from engagement with others but
> also gain the advantages
> that come with participation, one of which is that I
> would consider it my
> duty to make sure that that participation was given
> the appropriate
> consideration.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Kieren
> 
> 
> 
> 



 
____________________________________________________________________________
________
Never miss a thing.  Make Yahoo your home page. 
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.2/1142 - Release Date: 11/20/2007
17:44
 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.3/1144 - Release Date: 11/21/2007
16:28
 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance