[CCWG-ACCT] Proposal for a Community Veto Process on Key Board Decisions via Bylaws Amendment

[Carrie Devorah]

Question- coincidental to this conversation I am looking at historical
ICANN papers. ICANN is, as Steve told me, adressing policy. Then explain to
me please why ICANN is in the business of auctioning ccgTLDs and, becoming
a profitable business, 2012 assets were $500,000,000 (give or take a few
million)

On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 1:49 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
wrote:

>  I tend to agree with much of what Avri said.
>
> Board members are selected by SOs and At-Large  to represent them, but
> presumably because there is a belief that the prospective Board member
> shares a common set of values with the selecting organization. If the org
> comes to the beleif that they were mistaken, there is no doubt in my mind
> that they should be able to undo the selection. It will rarely if ever be
> used, but the possibility should ensure that Board members stay more in
> touch with the organization that selected them than is not sometimes the
> case. The removal needs to be unilateral and without a public rationale or
> opportunity for appeal.
>
> Removal of one or more Board members by the overall community is a more
> difficult one. It should certainly require a strong consensus. Removal of
> all of the Board is frought with all sorts of problems not the least of
> which who acts as the interim Board until a new one is selected.
>
> Alan
>
>
> At 05/02/2015 03:33 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
>
> On 04-Feb-15 19:07, Roelof Meijer wrote:
>
> Is the "the ability of the community to recall recalcitrant board members”
> also subject to the condition of the board not being unanimously or in
> super majority against such a recall? If it is, I think it will be useless.
>
>
> I would assume that removing a single board members would require some
> process by those who (s)elected the Board member and could be for any
> reason those (s)electors decided warranted such removal.
>
> It could, for example, be because the Board member never consulted with
> those who (s)elected them.  It could be becasue they weren't doing their
> job.  It could be because they were vile, vicious and vindictive.  I think
> the commuity that (s)elects a Board member should be able to remove them as
> they decide it is needed.  If their idea of what is good for ICANN is
> radically diffferent from the (s)electors then they should be removed.  We
> would need to develop processes within each f the ACSO that (s)elect, and
> would need to develop a nomcom removal process.
>
> As for removal of the chair or of the entire Board, that is a different
> issue, and I am not sure that I support the removal of the entire board,
> though removal of the chair by a community wide consensus might make sense.
>
> avri
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>  https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>


-- 
Sincerely
CARRIE Devorah
 562 688 2883



DISCLAIMER :
With the continuing crossing and interfacing of platforms both on & off
line both with & without our knowledge nor approval to note nothing sent
over the Internet anymore is ever private nor should be presumed to be so.
If it is that much of a secret, say nothing. If you must? Take a lesson
from our military- hand write the note, chew then swallow
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150206/33f56779/attachment.html>