[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [council] Some Thoughts on the Elections Process
I support this idea (=three Directors from different regions).
Geographical and culture diversity of Directors who are familiar
with DNSO-related issues will give broader view to ICANN Board.
In addition, it may help ICANN Board be more geographically
diverse.
Hiro
At 99/09/14 21:43, Joe Sims wrote:
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> ____
>
> This message is intended for the individual or entity named above. If you
> are not the intended
> recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to
> others; also please
> notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from
> your system. Thank you.
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> ____
>
> Dennis is correct that there is no specific requirement in the bylaws that
> the Directors selected by the DNSO must be geographically diverse.
> Instead, there is a probably unworkable aggregate provision, which is
> highly likely to be changed (the staff will likely recommend that the
> bylaws provide that each SO's Directors must be from different regions,
> unless specifically provided to the contrary in the bylaws or otherwise).
> Therefore, I suggest that the prudent and most desirable course for the
> DNSO would be to ensure that its three Directors are citizens of three
> different regions. This would make it virtually certain that whatever the
> ultimate bylaws requirement, the DNSO Directors would meet it. (I am aware
> of the discussion re: citizenship vs. residency, but citizenship is
> currently the standard and is not likely to change in the relevant time
> frame. Of course, if the Directors were both citizens and residents of
> three different regions, this would render this issue moot for the time
> being.)
>
>
>
> (Embedded
> image moved Dennis Jennings <Dennis.Jennings@ucd.ie>
> to file: 09/13/99 08:41 PM
> pic29250.pcx)
>
>
>
> Extension:
>
> To: "'Amadeu Abril i Abril'" <Amadeu@nominalia.com>
> cc: "'Javier'" <javier@aui.es>, "'council@dnso.org'"<council@dnso.org>
> (bcc: Joe Sims/JonesDay)
> Subject: RE: [council] Some Thoughts on the Elections Process
>
>
>
>
> Amadeu,
>
> No - I meant exactly what I said.
>
> If I read the rules correctly, these is not a requirement of these
> particular elections that a geographically diverse outcome is achieved.
>
> The Names Council could decide on this, as I said.
>
> If it does decide - and I would support such a decision, - it needs to be
> explicit, and get broad agreement so that there are no future disputes.
>
> To make it even clearer, I propose that
>
> "The Names Council agree that no two of the three ICANN Board Directors
> elected by the DNSO may be residents (citizens ?) of the same geographic
> region."
>
> Dennis
>
> On Monday, September 13, 1999 11:47 AM, Amadeu Abril i Abril
> [SMTP:Amadeu@nominalia.com] wrote:
> > Dennis Jennings wrote:
> > >
> > [...]
> >
> > > My point was that the rules (as I read them) do NOT require a
> > > geographically diverse outcome of these particular DNSO elections.
> > >
> > > The Names Council could decide that a geographically diverse outcome is
> > > required - and make this explicit. But it needs to decide this, not
> just
> > > assume it. It also needs to make sure that this decision is supported
> by
> > > the Constituencies and the ICANN Board.
> > >
> > Is this seious, Dennis? Do your really mean that you are not sure that
> > "most" NC members and "most" constituenncies really favour
> > geographical diversity as an output, or you are making a procedural
> > point about how excplicit this should be?
> >
> > In any case, in could hardly be more explicit in the Bylaws, and the
> > discussions and in our constituency, at least.
> >
> > Best regard,
> >
> > Amadeu
> >
>
>
>
>
----------
Hirofumi Hotta
R&D Strategy Department, NTT