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

["Terry L Davis, P.E." <tdavis2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Avri

 

I'm probably ok with your proposal, certainly on letting the Council vote on
the open-closed ballot issue; if we decide to close the ballot, the final
process may need a little discussion in Council.  I will have to think about
Alan's suggestion on absentee balloting in light of the actual attendance in
Seoul; having just suffered through a week of flu, things don't always occur
as planned.

 

I will add a personal view, with an open ballot on group leadership and in a
close ballot which I expect this to be; it could possibly change how the
ballot comes out.  Maybe for the best, but my 25 years serving on public
planning/development/land-use commissions is that it is not usually the
best.  Kristina already mentioned potential personal conflicts as a result
of an open ballot which I've seen before.  In my case as an NCA, I have
little concern that way but likely for some SG members and possibly
candidates, it may make for a hard decision.  All items I have read over the
years and my experience, shows that a percentage of folks will vote
differently, especially when selecting leaders, whether the ballot is open
or closed due to the external and personal pressures that then exist.

 

Now that said, I would have a very hard time voting to hold closed votes on
almost anything other than leadership selection that comes to mind; in fact
nothing does at the moment.

 

Take care

Terry

 

From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Gomes, Chuck
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 8:08 AM
To: Mary Wong
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: RE: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each
House determines a Candidate

 

Strictly from a personal point of view:  

*       I favor an open ballot for accountability and transparency reasons,
but I also respect the concerns of individual Councilors.
*       If just one Councilor requests a secret ballot, I then am fine with
a secret ballot with at least one caveat that the votes of each SG's reps be
communicated to the SG.
*       If am fine with Avri's suggestion to poll the Council regarding
whether to hold a secret or open ballot.

I have raised this issue on the RySG list and am waiting their direction.
In the end I will respond to the poll in accordance with that direction and
not my personal views.

 

Chuck

 


  _____  


From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of Mary Wong
Sent: Friday, October 16, 2009 12:18 AM
Cc: Council GNSO
Subject: Re: [council] Council wide Nominations are closed - Part 2 Each
House determines a Candidate

Hi

On Oct 15, 2009, at 3:56 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Do other council members believe this needs to be a secret ballot?

I think that at a time when there seems to be a lot of mistrust amongst the
ICANN community and. more importantly, when there are many new
entrants/participants and Councillors, it's important to have complete
transparency in the GNSO processes. As such, I don't support the idea of a
secret ballot in this case.

Cheers

Mary

 

 

Mary W S Wong

Professor of Law & Chair, IP Programs

Franklin Pierce Law Center

Two White Street

Concord, NH 03301

USA

Email: mwong@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Phone: 1-603-513-5143

Webpage: http://www.piercelaw.edu/marywong/index.php

Selected writings available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
at: http://ssrn.com/author=437584