>Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: BOUNCE [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Non-member submission from [[EMAIL PROTECTED] >(Kerry Miller)] >Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 19:15:44 -0400 (EDT) > >>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Aug 27 19:15:43 1999 >Return-Path: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Received: from jubilee.ns.sympatico.ca (jubilee.ns.sympatico.ca [142.177.1.6]) > by ns1.vrx.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6648F005 > for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Fri, 27 Aug 1999 19:15:42 -0400 (EDT) >Received: from LOCALNAME ([142.177.76.9]) by jubilee.ns.sympatico.ca > (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO203-101c) > ID# 607-61802U68000L68000S0V35) with ESMTP id AAA25756; > Fri, 27 Aug 1999 20:08:20 -0300 >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kerry Miller) >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: Fri, 27 Aug 1999 20:12:46 +0000 >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII >Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT >Subject: At Large Council >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Priority: normal >X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v3.12) >Message-ID: <19990827230819.AAA25756@LOCALNAME> > > >Re the Santiago resolution "that the At-Large Directors should be >selected by an At-Large Council, the members of which are directly >elected by the at-large members of ICANN," as posted at > http://www.icann.org/santiago/santiago-resolutions.htm > >I recall with fondness those early, headily enthusiastic days when >the proposed Bylaws included such phrases as > >"(c) At Large Board members > other than those serving on the > Initial Board shall be elected > by a process to be determined > by a majority vote of all At > Large members of the Initial > Board, FOLLOWING SOLICITATION OF > INPUT FROM ALL INTERESTED PARTIES [see Note] > AND CONSIDERATION OF ALL SUCH > SUGGESTIONS. AT A MINIMUM, > SUCH A PROCESS SHALL CONSIST OF > NOMINATIONS FROM INTERNET > USERS, INDUSTRY PARTICIPANTS, > AND ORGANIZATIONS, AND SHOULD > GIVE CONSIDERATION TO SUCH > NOMINEES. Unless a majority > vote of the At Large members > of the Initial Board determines > that it is not possible to create > a workable membership > structure, such process shall > call for election of At Large > directors by one or more > categories of members of the > Corporation admitted pursuant > to qualifications established by > majority vote of the At Large > members of the Initial Board. > Any process for election by > members shall provide an > initial means for determining > adequate support for any > nominee and establish > qualifications for submission to > the membership." > --From Section 9 of the IANA draft proposal for the establishment >of ICANN as a non-profit, public-interest organization. > >I'm sure it is not the intention of the Interim Board to create a >rubber-stamp council of any sort -- for a group of 9 officers to >appoint a group of 18 councillors to select a new group of 9 officers >would be too blatantly antidemocratic to even think of -- but, >to the degree that this resolution contradicts the MAC >recommendation (as set forth by mediating staff at > http://www.icann.org/santiago/membership-staff-report.htm ) that >"'Members' should be individuals, and only 'members' should vote >for At Large Directors," and indeed insulates the Board from the >direct expression of the wishes of any At large Membership, it >behooves the Interim Board to make public the detailed basis of its >apparent determination that no other 'workable membership >structure' could be found. > >Admittedly, the staff report goes on to recommend "that the Board >adopt the CONCEPT of an At Large Membership Council, with >duties and responsibilities to the At Large membership..." but this >is hardly a mandate to create a Council which (s)elects the At >large Directors, nor is it clear that this in any way creates 'parity' >with the Supporting Organizations. > >If some analogue to the SO's Council structure is desirable, can >its formation not be left to the at large membership as it was left to >the DSO, the PSO, and the ASO? (Would not this task, in fact, be >an excellent proving ground for the ability of an at large >membership to learn to work together as a body?) Is it the Interim >Board's intention to _define_ the At Large membership as a >Supporting Organization (ALSO)? (Could this decision not have >been made several months ago?) While the Interim Board may >see itself as a doting parent, I'm nevertheless curious what age >group it imagines its troublesome membership to have, that it must >be so assidiously protected from any possible contact with the real >administrative world. > > >kerry > >========= >Note: > >Perhaps the one substantive 'input from interested parties' (out of a >total of 9 at http://www.icann.org/comments- >mail/membership/current/ ) > >is msg00005.html : > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Membership] At Large membership discussion > From: Izumi AIZU <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 24 Aug 1999 07:26:21 +0800 > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Hi, as I posted before [msg00001, 12 Aug], we are going to have an >informal, but open meeting about this At Large membership staff >report (and all related topics), here in Santiago. > >The first one is set just 60 minutes from now - (sorry for this late >announcement), to see who are interested and discuss how to >proceed, during the Santiago meeting and beyond. [...] > > > > -- "So foul a sky clears not without a storm" - Shakespeare
