Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each House determines a Candidate

[William Drake <william.drake@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Avri,

Two questions.

On Oct 16, 2009, at 10:07 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
> As there is a difference of opinion within the council on this, it  
> seems to me the only path is to vote on whether this ballot is  
> secret or not.
If we do this, would the votes on whether to have a secret vote be  
publicly record, as with a motion, or is this qualitatively  
different?  I'm not familiar with past practice and don't have time at  
the moment to search the bylaws for a deconstructable passage.
> As I said, I will ask staff to make sure we are set up for a secret  
> ballot, should the vote go that way.  And I see this as being a vote  
> that will only required a majority of the two houses under the new  
> Council Procedures that will, hopefully, be approved by then.
If the vote goes this way, what happens to the rights of elected  
representatives to have their vote publicly known?  Can we publicly  
announce our votes anyway, or would we be constrained from doing so?   
If it is the latter then NCUC and perhaps the appointed councilors  
will not be able to participate.  There is no way in hell we tell our  
constituents sorry, we can't tell you how we voted, and frankly it  
would be pretty embarrassing in the world outside the moat as well.
One might add that it is at least worth contemplating whether a secret  
election is in ICANN's institutional interest at this particular  
geopolitical juncture.  It certainly would be something for the AoC  
review panel on accountability to chew on, and would be a real field  
day for ICANN's critics in government, civil society, the press, etc  
around the world.
Best,

Bill