[WP1] [CCWG-ACCT] updated paper: Recall of the ICANN Board

Alan Greenberg alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
Thu Jul 23 21:26:31 UTC 2015


How can we do that? At any given time, they may not have an Board 
names in reserve.   Alan

At 23/07/2015 03:50 PM, Thomas Rickert wrote:
>I suggest we say NomCom shall not put up less than two.
>
>That should give enough flexibility to cover all wishes that were 
>brought forward.
>
>Thomas
>
>========
><http://rickert.net>rickert.net
>
>PS - Sent from my cell. Please excuse typos and brevity.
>
>Am 23.07.2015 um 20:41 schrieb Greg Shatan 
><<mailto:gregshatanipc at gmail.com>gregshatanipc at gmail.com>:
>
>>I think this point has moved on a bit, based on the call earlier 
>>today.  The NomCom will not be putting up alternates.  I believe 
>>where we are now is that the NomCom will (in the event of a spill) 
>>put up at least two and possibly up to eight interim directors at 
>>that time.  I'm not sure but they may have the option of not 
>>putting up directors at all, but I think that did not come out on 
>>top in the call.
>>
>>NomCom gets more good candidates than they nominate, so there is a 
>>pool from which to draw on, should the time ever come.
>>
>>I think this is right or close to it, but the next draft should 
>>clear this up.
>>
>>Greg
>>
>>On Thu, Jul 23, 2015 at 2:28 PM, Seun Ojedeji 
>><<mailto:seun.ojedeji at gmail.com>seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>I agree with this as well, although I thought there was clear 
>>direction on this subject in Paris.
>>
>>Regards
>>
>>Sent from Google nexus 4
>>kindly excuse brevity and typos.
>>On 23 Jul 2015 7:23 pm, "Cherine Chalaby" 
>><<mailto:cherine.chalaby at icann.org>cherine.chalaby at icann.org> wrote:
>>I agree. It does not make sense to ask NomCom to nominate 
>>alternates.   Cherine
>>>On 23 Jul 2015, at 15:23, Marilyn Cade 
>>><<mailto:marilynscade at hotmail.com>marilynscade at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I agree with not asking the NomCom to put up alternates. Spilling 
>>>the Board should be so exceptional and a smaller exe board should 
>>>be able to then launch a process, which could result in both 
>>>elections and in appointments.
>>>M
>>>
>>> > Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:13:13 +0100
>>> > From: <mailto:malcolm at linx.net>malcolm at linx.net
>>> > To: <mailto:jordan at internetnz.net.nz>jordan at internetnz.net.nz; 
>>> <mailto:wp1 at icann.org>wp1 at icann.org; 
>>> <mailto:accountability-cross-community at icann.org>accountability-cross-community at icann.org
>>> > Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] updated paper: Recall of the ICANN Board
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On 23/07/2015 11:18, Jordan Carter wrote:
>>> > > See my edits in the files beginning with 2015-07-23.
>>> >
>>> > One comment: I thought the general view in Paris was that NomCom would
>>> > not nominate members of an interim Board. I doubt the practicality of
>>> > requiring it to do so.
>>> >
>>> > That seems to have changed; perhaps I missed some discussion. Or
>>> > misperceived the general view.
>>> >
>>> > Requiring NomCom to put up alternates at the AGM creates the "people
>>> > standing in the shadows waiting for a chance" that were mentioned as a
>>> > prospect to be avoided, and was accepted as a reason for not requiring
>>> > SOs and ACs to nominate alternates with every appointment.
>>> >
>>> > Moreover, how will NomCom find people willing to commit to drop
>>> > everything and become an interim director in the unlikely event of a
>>> > Board spill, knowing that it is highly unlikely this will ever come to
>>> > pass?
>>> >
>>> > It is surely much easier to ask someone "Will you agree to serve as a
>>> > director now?" than "Will you agree to serve as a director in an
>>> > unspecified number of months, should some very unlikely event come to
>>> > pass?".
>>> >
>>> > For these reasons, I think that excusing NomCom from nominating interim
>>> > directors is a better choice.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Malcolm Hutty | tel: <tel:%2B44%2020%207645%203523>+44 20 7645 3523
>>> > Head of Public Affairs | Read the LINX Public Affairs blog
>>> > London Internet Exchange | 
>>> <http://publicaffairs.linx.net/>http://publicaffairs.linx.net/
>>> >
>>> > London Internet Exchange Ltd
>>> > 21-27 St Thomas Street, London SE1 9RY
>>> >
>>> > Company Registered in England No. 3137929
>>> > Trinity Court, Trinity Street, Peterborough PE1 1DA
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > _______________________________________________
>>> > Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>> > 
>>> <mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>> > https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>>><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>><mailto:Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org>Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>WP1 mailing list
>><mailto:WP1 at icann.org>WP1 at icann.org
>>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
>_______________________________________________
>WP1 mailing list
>WP1 at icann.org
>https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/wp1
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/wp1/attachments/20150723/56e68349/attachment.html>


More information about the WP1 mailing list