Re: [council] Nomination / Voting procedures - DNSO ICANNBoard member

[Javier <javier@aui.es>]

Maybe I am wrong, but I don't remember creating this task force.

Also, we need to elect our directors before October 15th, which means that 
we have to decide on this issue very quickly.

I propose the following resolution for our next teleconference:

Resolved that:

1) Any person nominated by a member of the DNSO and supported by at least 
nine other members before october 8th, 1999 will be considered as candidate 
for ICANN Board membership by the DNSO.

2) A public comment e-mail address will be opened immediatly. All 
nominations a support for nominations should be sent to this address. No 
other nominations or shows of support will be considered.

3) A wide public call for nominations will be done as soon as the list is 
set up.

4) The election will take place between october 8th and october 15th. Each 
member of the Names Council will cast three votes for three different 
candidates.

5) After the closing of the voting period, the secretariat of the DNSO will 
send to the Names Council a list of the Candidates with the number of votes 
received by each one of them. The following candidates will be recognized 
as DNSO ICANN Board members:

a) The candidate with the largest number of votes (Board Member "A").

b) If there are candidates from regions different from the region of Board 
Member "A", the candidate from another region with the largest number of 
votes will also become a DNSO member of the ICANN Board (Board Member "B"). 
If there are no candidates from other regions, the candidates in second and 
third place will become Board Members "B" and "C".

c) If there are candidates from regions different to those of Board Members 
"A" and "B", the candidate with the largest number of votes who is not from 
those regions will be considered Board member "C". If there are no 
candidates from other regions, the candidate with the largest number of 
votes (excluding Board members "A" and "B") will become Board Member "C".

6) Board member "A" will serve for three years. Board member "B" will serve 
for two years and Board "Member "C" will serve for one year.

Javier





At 08:07 9/09/99 +0100, Nigel Roberts wrote:
>Well, since Dennis has a task force set up to examine this, I would
>suggest
>input is sent to that task force and that a report is done, circulated
>14 days in advance of the LA meeting and a decision taken on its
>contents.
>
>But while we are on the subject, the ICANN bylaws require the following:
>
>1.      3 candidates to be elected
>2.      the electorate is the members of the Names Counci
>3       each successful candidate have
>         "over 50% of the affirmative votes of the NC members".
>
>
>I personally also favour something like Javier's plan.
>
>There are well researched voting systems around the world which fulfil
>the
>all the above criteria, i.e.  whereby each successful candidate has
>"over 50%
>of affirmative votes" (direct quote from ICANN bylaws) and
>preferential voting, as Javier is suggesting in his email.
>
>Now I would suggest that, to avoid any criticism that we are again
>doing the work of properly appointed sub-groups, I might
>suggest that if you agree (or disagree) with  Javier's points you send
>your input direct to Dennis as the co-ordinator of the Board Elections
>task force (which I also volunteered to be a member of).
>
>
>
>Nigel
>
>Javier wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >The next question is who can vote, and how many votes can they have - ie:
> > >FICPI is only one member out of 12 in the IPC, but FICPI has over 4,500
> > >individual members. Similarly, if all the individual members of the other
> > >IPC organizations are taken into account, then there are well over 40,000
> > >members in the IPC.  Maybe, we can have a system of voting by 
> constituency,
> > >whereby each constituency has 1 vote (i.e. 1 vote  which it could cast for
> > >each of the 3 candidates that it supports).  In one model that the IPC
> > >used, there were a number of points allocated to the three votes to
> > >determine the order of preference (1st place - 5 points;  2nd place - 3
> > >points;  3rd place - 1 point).
> >
> > We could simplify this to having each member of the NC vote for 3
> > candidates. Candidates with the largest amount of votes win, except if
> > there is somebody from their region that has more votes.
> >
> > Each constituency would decide if it is up to their representatives to vote
> > or if they want to mandate a given vote. (whatever each constituency
> > decides is not part of the voting procedure).