[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [ga] nomination procedures



On Tue, Nov 16, 1999 at 02:47:32PM +1100, Mark Perkins wrote:
> Kent
> 
> Can you please list them - would be useful

As it turns out there are many more than 4, with various kinds of
overlap.  After reading them all over, I am of the opinion that John
Klensin's final comments proposing to follow the BoD procedures are
exactly to the point, so I would like to concretize his proposal as
follows:

  The GA will select five nominated names and forward those 5 names
  to the NC.  The list of five names will include the following:

  1) Levels of support will be shown by a list of 10 names of GA
  members in support of the nominee.  We use the same definition of
  "GA member" that was used for the BoD nomination:  Any member of 
  the ga, ga-announce, WG lists, and Constituency lists.

  2) To assure that the NC can make an educated evaluation of
  candidates, each nominee must provide a short background, and
  statement of purpose and objectives the nominee has in the role as
  Chair of the GA.  This should include: what the nominee can and
  will do for the GA and its role in the DNSO; how they intend to
  interact with the NC and the 7 constituencies within the DNSO and
  the GA; and anything else the nominee considers important. 


John's proposal is essentially a continuation of the status quo; and
there is no mechanism to select between new proposals.  At some
future time we may have such a mechanism, but we don't now, and we
aren't likely to get anything close to agreement on anything new in
the time frame available to us. 


               --------------------------------

Here is the list of proposals -- 8 by my count.  Some overlap and
retraction, but it's hard know for sure...


1. Idno: 

  WE NOMINATE A SINGLE CANDIDATE FOR THE NC TO CHOOSE FROM

2. Jonathan Miller:

  potential candidates post and a list of credentials

  We then need to develop a procedure by which the GA
  can vote on perspective candidates and elect nominees.  I submit
  that there needs to be an impartial collection of votes to insure
  the integrity of this process.  Further, I suggest that the top
  five nominees from the GA be submitted to the Names Council for
  consideration. 

3. Jonathan Weinberg:

  I propose that we use the same mechanism for putting forward names,
  and demonstrating support, that we used in nominating individuals
  as DNSO selections for the ICANN Board.

  The more difficult
  question is how many names we should forward to the NC.  Jonathan
  Miller recommended that we forward the top five vote-getters;
  myself, I'd suggest forwarding the top three. 

4. Roberto Gaetano:

  1.  "Nominators" 

  The "nominators" are the individuals subscribed to the GA list at
  the date of opening of the nomination period (26th of November
  1999, time-of-day TBD).

  2.  Nominees
             
  The nominee has to be a member of the GA (at date/time above).
  
  whoever is accepting to run for Chairman should resign from NC or
  ICANN BoD, if applicable and should not be an officer of other
  Supporting Organizations

  3.  Preferences

  Each "nominator" can express 3 preferences, in a definite order. 
  The first preference counts 3 points, the second 2, the third 1. 
  Preferences have to be geographically distributed, i.e.  not more
  than one person per geographical region.  if a nominee renounces,
  the nominator loses his/her vote.  I propose that we start already
  nominating informally candidates

  4.  Results

  The 3 nominees totalizing the highest number of "points" will be
  proposed to the Name Council as the GA candidates.  No geographical
  distribution criterion is applied (in other words, the three names
  transmitted to the NC can come from the same region). 

5. Andy Gardner:

  I hereby move that the person who received the greatest support
  from the DNSO during the GA board membership nominations be the
  sole DNSO nominee for the GA chair position. 

6. Jonathan Weinberg:

  [1] Each GA member casts X votes (that is, one vote for each of X
  candidates) with preferential weighting (Roberto's proposal)

  [2] Each GA member can vote for as many candidiates as he chooses
  (my proposal -- it's the system we used to "vote" for the DNSO's
  ICANN Bd members). 


7. Javier Rodriguez:

  1) All the list members on the GA and Announcement list are able to
  give 3 votes. 
  2) The will put the name of the 3 people in order.  The first one
  will get 3 points, the 2nd one will get 2 points and the third one
  will get 1 point. 
  3) It is possible to vote just for 2 people, the first one with 3
  points, and the 2nd one with one point.  In the same fashion is
  possible to vote just for one person who will get 3 points. 
  4) All the members in the GA and Announcement lists who are
  subscribed before Nov.  19 are able to vote. 
  5) The 10 most voted candidates will go for a second round in the
  same fashion: 3,2,1 points for the first, second, and 3rd name that
  each person write in his/her mail. 
  5) From this 10 list, the 2 most voted pre-candidates will be
  presented to the NC so this body can choose wich one they feel
  would be a Chairman who will have strong support from the members
  of the GA (Understanding the GA as the members of both lists: GA
  and Annoucements). 


8. John Klensin:

  I would suggest that we return to a (somewhat more clear)
  variation of the theme used to nominate people for consideration
  for the board, i.e., a nomination and some minimum threshold of
  endorsers, rather than an election.  It is obviously important that
  we be clear about the rules and conventions this time, e.g., who
  can nominate or endorse and whether any special value is to be
  attributed to extra endorsers.  But, since I can't read the current
  procedures as requiring the NC to accept the GA's first choice,
  even if such a choice could be clearly determined, I don't see a
  lot of point in trying to cut things more finely than that. 


-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain