- lac-discuss-es - lists.iana.org

Re: [lac-discuss-es] mis comentarios relacionados con la Enmienda
by omar＠kaminski.adv.br March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: mis comentarios relacionados con la Enmienda De: omar(a)kaminski.adv.br Aunque la mayor parte del tiempo que he estado al acecho aquí, porque el RT Whois, estoy después de algunas discusiones importantes y aquí va mi centavos de dólar en dos Comentarios Vanda y también teniendo en cuenta de Jacqueline último correo electrónico de Brasil están "excluidos" de las definiciones. Omar 03/03/2012 Vanda UOL <vanda(a)uol.com.br> : > 1) the right of ALSes to vote in LACRALO affairs determined by a > minimum level of participation > > This is positive > 2) working languages expanded to French and Portuguese > > I donŽt see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern. > ( but I donŽt see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages they have > there les recomiendo que la barrera - quiero decir, sólo Brasil (y quizás Portugal, Cabo Verde) se beneficiarán de portugués y la Guayana Francesa, Surinam y Haití (directa) del francés. Si tenemos en cuenta el Brasil debe tener más ALS que significa que debemos tener estructuras más allá de brasileños inglés / español que se hablan unos a un verdadero representante participationtion. (...) > 7) LACRALO would elect 2 persons to serve on ALAC and 2 others as their > > respective alternates (diversity requirements shall not apply to elected > ALAC member and their alternate). > > I disagree - diversity shall apply. The principles of ICANN states on > diversity. The concentration of persons from just one country for instance, > is not democratic neither safe for the organization. ( imagine if the two > big countries Mexico and Brazil decide to make a strong movement to take > over this group, can be control all the positions) really not safe. Must > have diversity. ejemplo) tiene el mismo peso que los países (y no importa el tasa de población), que es lo mismo si Haití (o Brasil, o Uruguai) tiene 3 o 13 delegados de ELA. Deben llegar a un consenso de todos modos. _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/cdd87b291a.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] =? Iso-8859-1? Q? RES = 3A_Propuestas_de_la_considera? == Iso-8859-1? Q? Ci = F3n? =
by jam＠jacquelinemorris.com March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: =? Iso-8859-1? Q? RES = 3A_Propuestas_de_la_considera? == Iso-8859-1? Q? Ci = F3n? = De: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com Hola Sylvia Tengo la sensación de que hay una vez más un malentendido ... La propuesta que fue comentada es la de aquí: (PDF en Inglés) . Enviado por Cntra ayer por la noche. Y el bit en particular que pensé que podría llevar a Brasil no ser considera que se citan a continuación: El Caribe significa que todos los países de la región del Caribe limitada por el Caribe Mar, no siendo predominantemente de habla española y que forma parte del Caribe Comunidad; América Latina significa que todos los países de la América Latina Región, siendo predominantemente de habla española y la historia que tiene mucho ininterrumpida española gobernar ". Y dado que Brasil se cae ni en la Comunidad del Caribe, y no se puede considerar Caribe, ni es predominantemente española hablar y tener siempre el dominio español sin interrupciones, yo no lo veo colocar en la definición de ALC propuesto aquí tampoco, por lo que mi preocupación se - dadas estas dos definiciones en la propuesta de Cintra, Brasil es mi mente de hecho quedar fuera de esta propuesta. Esa fue mi pregunta para explicación de Cintra como el redactor de esas definiciones. Estoy totalmente de creer que Brasil es una parte vital e importante de la región de ALC región y desearía que la definición modificada para asegurarse de que Brasil está claramente incluido. Estoy escribiendo esto durante una pausa en la clase, así que no puedo entrar en detalles sobre los otros puntos que plantear, pero creo firmemente que los individuos se debe permitir a participar, pero no necesariamente en la forma que aquÃ se propone. Jacqueline A. Morris La tecnologÃa debe ser como el oxÃgeno: Ubicua, necesaria, invisible y Gratis. (AfterChris Lehmann) El mar, 06 de marzo 2012 a las 9:25 AM, <sylvia(a)prontocl.com.br> escribiÃ³: > > [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] > > Subject: =? Iso-8859-1? Q? RES = 3A_Propuestas_de_la_considera? == Iso-8859-1? Q? Ci = F3n? = > From: sylvia(a)prontocl.com.br > > Dear J > You can stay calm as absolute Brazil ARE NOT EXCLUDED. > As is that ESTs dividing the region? For languages??? > In addition to having 4 ALS, we believe and are part of > Latin American and Latino home that we are too. > We really must be having a serious problem of Translation An because > just what this group estproponiendo in its amendments is that all > their "officers" have 2 years in office and the possibility to re-choice. ( > share with you the thought that 1 year is totally unproductive). And > again LACRALO agree with you that you can not pass all > years busy choosing their "officers" not really understand that in the > amendments sent?? > THEN, urgent need that the secretary (and that is before > we all meet in CR) to send to the Official Trasnlation > proposal. > For your questions I see everything upside ESTs understanding! > Not talking in no time that "Individual participation". Everything > contrary to that! > It is our thought that all citizens of a country to participate > travs of an ALS. > I hope I have helped you understand a bit more. > Kisses > Sylvia > -------------------------------------------------- - > sylvia(a)internautabrasil.org > > > > > ----- Mensagem Original ----- > From: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome > jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com > Posted in: Tuesday, March 6, 2012 8:38 > To: lac-discuss-es(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Cc: lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Assunto: Re: Proposals for the consideracin > > > > > [[- Translated text (in -> en) -]] > > > Subject: Re: Proposals for the consideracin > From: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com > > > Hello > Some comments: > > > > > The first thing you notice the definition of Latin America is that > Brazil esttotalmente excluded, being neither the Caribbean nor > Espaola speaking. > > > > > The idea of \u200b\u200balternating presidents and secretaras of the terms > an ao > harque continuity difficult. It takes more than a year to achieve > fully operational. The official exchange of all years, > basically, > LACRALO Administration has more personal and less dependent > effective. > > > > > With regard to participation individually, I'm not sure how you will > work. It is each individual will count as a prior license to the > aggregate > counting them as no more than 50% of ALS in each country? So > if, for example, in a country with an ALS, and an individual user, > The individual has the same voting weight as ALS? > > > > > Only my first thoughts and questions. > > > > > > > > > Jacqueline A.Morris > The technology should be like oxygen: ubiquitous, necessary, invisible and > Free. (AfterChris Lehmann) > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Monday, March 5, 2012 at 11:59 PM, Cintra Sooknanan > <cintra.sooknanan(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> Please see motions for consideration which create and enshrine diversity >> and representation in our region at >> > % 20to% 20ensure% 20of% 20lacralo 20diversity%%% 20alac 20officers% 20and% 20Individu > a% 20participation.pdf >> . >> >> I also recognise the work of the By Law Working group and their draft >> amendments are located here >> https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/LACRALO+Bylaw+Working+Group >> > LO + Rules + of + Procedure +2010 + - + RULE +1 >> . >> >> Thank you >> >> Cintra >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > > > > > > > > > > > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/39a1906ccb.html --]]

1 0

Re: Propuestas de la consideraci�n
by jam＠jacquelinemorris.com March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Propuestas de la consideración De: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com Hola Algunos comentarios: La primera cosa que noté en la definición de América Latina es que Brasil está totalmente excluido, no siendo ni el Caribe ni De habla española. La idea de la alternancia de presidentes y las secretarías de los términos de un año hará que la continuidad difícil. Se tarda más de un año para conseguir en pleno funcionamiento. El intercambio de oficiales de todos los años, básicamente, tiene la administración LACRALO más dependientes de personal y menos eficaz. Con respecto a la participación individual, no estoy seguro de cómo va a trabajar. Es cada individuo va a contar como una licencia previa con el agregado de ellos contando como no más de 50% de las ALS en cada país? Tan si, por ejemplo, en un país con uno ALS, y 1 usuario individual, ¿El individuo tiene el mismo peso de voto como la ELA? Sólo mis primeros pensamientos y preguntas. Jacqueline A.Morris La tecnología debe ser como el oxígeno: Ubicua, necesaria, invisible y Gratis. (AfterChris Lehmann) El lunes, 05 de marzo 2012 a las 11:59 PM, Cintra Sooknanan <cintra.sooknanan(a)gmail.com> escribió: > Dear All, > > Please see motions for consideration which create and enshrine diversity > and representation in our region at > http://dl.dropbox.com/u/877052/LACRALO-Costa-Rica-Events-WG/bylaws/proposal… > . > > I also recognise the work of the By Law Working group and their draft > amendments are located here > https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/LACRALO+Bylaw+Working+Group > https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/Draft+modifications+of+the+LACR… > . > > Thank you > > Cintra > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/0560a0fc8b.html --]]

2 1

Showcase - Costa Rica
by José Francisco Arce March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

Estimados, Es una verguenza que a esta altura solo tengamos con Dev la informacion de 10 ALSes de 38 para el showcase, - ACUI - Internauta Brazil - Internauta Venezuela - Internauta Argentina - APADIT - TTCS - Ageia Densi Argentina - Ageia Densi Colombia - IIIDISI - Cetic Porfavor, los demas, les solicitamos que envien lo solicitado hasta el 7 de marzo. Sino lo hicieren se utilizara la informacion que dieron al acreditarse como ALS. Saludos José Arce.-

8 9

Propuestas de la consideraci�n
by cintra.sooknanan＠gmail.com March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Tema: Propuestas de la consideración De: cintra.sooknanan(a)gmail.com Queridos todos, Por favor, consulte las propuestas de la consideración que crean y consagrar la diversidad y la representación en nuestra región en . También reconozco el trabajo del grupo de trabajo por la Ley y su proyecto modificaciones se encuentran aquí https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/LACRALO+Bylaw+Working+Group https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/Draft+modifications+of+the+LACR… . Gracias Cintra _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/dcb34eb662.html --]]

3 2

mociones propuestas para su consideraci�n en LACRALO GA en 14 de marzo 2012
by devtee＠gmail.com March 6, 2012

March 6, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: mociones propuestas para su consideración en LACRALO GA en 14 de marzo 2012 De: devtee(a)gmail.com Por favor encuentre movimientos adjuntos, la consideración de distintos LACRALO de menos la Asamblea General de 14 de marzo 2012 * Propuesta para modificar la Regla 12.9 de las Reglas de Procedimiento * Movimiento para actualizar el artículo 7.3 de la versión en español de la ROP para cumplir con redacción de la Regla 7.3 de la versión en Inglés de la ROP * Propuesta para actualizar la numeración de la Regla 8.1 de retinopatía del prematuro * Movimiento para actualizar la Regla 11.2 en la versión española de la ROP para cumplir con El artículo 11.2 en versión en Inglés de ROP y actualización de numeración de la Regla 11.2 * Movimiento para actualizar el artículo 8.2 en la versión española de la ROP para cumplir con redacción de la Regla 8.2 en versión en Inglés de la ROP * Movimiento para actualizar el artículo 14.4 de la ROP El enlace PDF en Inglés se puede encontrar en http://db.tt/sS3Uo9Y8 Saludos cordiales, Dev Anand Teelucksingh LACRALO Secretaría [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/8228727d08.html --]]

2 1

Re: [lac-discuss-es] Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda
by jam＠jacquelinemorris.com March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda De: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com Ok - esa es otra cuestión de la traducción. Ignorante no era una palabra usada por mí. Yo, básicamente, miró a cada elemento, miró a los estatutos, correos electrónicos, otros documentos, material de otros, etc RALO y pensado para una pareja día. Mis comentarios eran estrictamente en el documento, no en las personas que lo creó, o en consideración de las mociones ni nada de eso. Tuve que lidiar con el documento como una propuesta de comentario en la lista, ya que era presentado a mí. Y dado que otros enviaron sus observaciones a la lista, yo era confundido en cuanto a por qué los demás podía comentar sin hacer referencia a RP, pero no mí. Así que vamos a seguir adelante en el contenido, y no saltar a conclusiones basadas en acordó una mala traducción! Mirando hacia adelante a ver la semana que viene. El 05 de marzo 2012 7:28 PM ", Natalia Enciso" <natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com> escribió: > Dear Jaqueline, I am sorry if I sounded agressive it was not my intention. > It might be an interpretation mistake. > I am trying to put things in order at my office before travelling, thats > why I just sent a quick message. > If we are expressing our feelings I also felt ofended when saying that we > are ignorant. > I regret this is happening. I felt discriminated just because I wasn`t > from the begining I cannot have and express my opinion. > I don`t know who did ask about comments but what Fatima sent was the > proposal to discuss in the GA which according to the RoP is the proper > place to do this. > > Take care, > Natalia > > > > 2012/3/5 Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> > >> Does Rule 11 apply to comments requested on a proposal? >> I was asked, as were we all, to comment on the draft as sent by Sylvia. I >> took my time, considered carefully and thoughtfully, and, like Vanda, and >> others, sent my comments as requested. >> I really didn't expect such a quick reply, which suggests that my >> comments were not as studied by you as the proposal was studied by me over >> the past four days. I also didn't expect the tone, but maybe, given the >> kind of messages that have been posted recently, I might have been naive to >> expect differently. >> Jacqueline >> On Mar 5, 2012 6:10 PM, "Natalia Enciso" <natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Please proceed according to rule 11, thanks. >>> >>> Rule 11 - Resolutions and Amendments >>> 11.1 Draft resolutions and amendments may be proposed by the >>> participants referred to in Rule 1 and shall be transmitted in >>> writing to the Secretariat of the Assembly, which shall circulate >>> copies to all participants. >>> 11.2 As a general rule, no draft resolution or amendment shall be >>> discussed or put to the >>> vote unless it has been circulated sufficiently in advance, but in no >>> case less than two weeks, to all participants in the working languages of >>> the Assembly. >>> >>> Should a vote in a virtual meeting not be quorate, then the chair shall >>> extend the close of the vote for an equal amount of time as the original >>> voting period. By the end of this extension, no quorum will be >>> required. APPROVED >>> >>> >>> 2012/3/5 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> >>> >>>> Dear All: >>>> Plus 1 to these observations. >>>> >>>> Plus 1 for the recommendations contained here. >>>> >>>> - Carlton Samuels >>>> >>>> ============================== >>>> Carlton A Samuels >>>> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >>>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >>>> ============================= >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jacqueline Morris >>>> <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>wrote: >>>> >>>> > Sorry I have taken so long - I really wanted to do proper research and >>>> > make reasoned, logical comments in line with the role of the RALOs, >>>> > the values and MSH model of ICANN, and the ALAC improvements. I also >>>> > looked at the original emails around the formation of the RALOs to >>>> > refresh my memory as to why certain specific clauses were in the >>>> > Operating Principles. >>>> > >>>> > I tried not to make it an academic treatise with loads of references >>>> > and footnotes, but I do have them, in case anyone would like to know >>>> > more about why I made specific comments. >>>> > >>>> > Also sorry for the length of the document - I could not make it >>>> > shorter, try as I might. >>>> > >>>> > Comments on the proposal for modification of the LACRALO Operating >>>> > Principles and Rules of Procedure >>>> > >>>> > In general, I believe that the items contained in the proposal are >>>> > overly broad and sweeping, will change the entire character of the >>>> > LACRALO, and not for the better. They seem designed to create a >>>> > massive bureaucratic organisation in which there are almost 30% >>>> > chiefs, with few workers, and also seem designed to discard both the >>>> > diverse nature of LACRALO and any pretense of democracy that remains >>>> > in the organisation. >>>> > >>>> > To specifics:: >>>> > >>>> > Paragraph 2: >>>> > >>>> > This item is designed to allow for rules to be created to allow >>>> > individual participation in LACRALO. This is something that has been >>>> > in process for five years. Instead of treating with the substantive >>>> > theme of this item, increased participation by all end-users in the >>>> > region, the proposed modification seeks to insert participation >>>> > requirements to limit participation by the ALSes, and ignores the >>>> > individual user. >>>> > >>>> > I suggest that the proposed modification be stricken, and a motion >>>> > proposed instead that states: >>>> > >>>> > Whereas >>>> > Individuals who wish to participate in LACRALO are not able to so do >>>> > solely because there is no accredited ALS in their country; >>>> > We propose that >>>> > Any individual seeking to participate must: >>>> > be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the LAC >>>> > region as defined by ICANN, >>>> > not be a member of a certified ALS. >>>> > Such individuals will be allowed to join LACRALO as individual >>>> > members and participate in LACRALO activities including votes. >>>> > Such individuals will be subject to all LACRALO rules and >>>> requirements. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Along with this, we propose a modification to the text of para 1 of >>>> > the Operating Principles: >>>> > >>>> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >>>> > Caribbean accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >>>> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >>>> > policies >>>> > >>>> > to >>>> > >>>> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >>>> > Caribbean region as defined by ICANN, as well as qualified individual >>>> > members, accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >>>> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >>>> > policies >>>> > >>>> > Proposed new text is shown in bold. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Paragraph 4 >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > This proposal was the most difficult for me to wrap my mind around. To >>>> > me, it seemed simply ridiculous. However, I will attempt to break it >>>> > down and deal with each item. >>>> > >>>> > LACRALOs supreme and sovereign governing body will be a General >>>> > Assembly. >>>> > >>>> > This is inconsistent with the actuality of the LACRALO. The LACRALO >>>> > only exists inside of and subject to ICANN, via the ALAC. Hence the >>>> > insertion of the terms supreme and sovereign just seems ridiculous >>>> > to me, and I suggest those terms be stricken and the original language >>>> > retained. >>>> > >>>> > The governing body of the LACRALO will be a General Assembly >>>> > >>>> > Next: >>>> > >>>> > Each ALS accredited in the General Assembly will be entitled to one >>>> > vote. >>>> > >>>> > This removes the weighting provision that was specifically imposed to >>>> > allow countries with fewer ALSes by virtue of smaller populations to >>>> > have a more equitable voice alongside larger countries which may have >>>> > many more ALSes. Removal of this provision will lead to capture of the >>>> > LACRALO by larger countries, and I strongly object to the removal of >>>> > the weighting system, and request that this text be stricken. >>>> > >>>> > Next: >>>> > Said representatives shall also act for the duration of their >>>> > appointment as official contacts of the ALS vis-à-vis the LACRALO,with >>>> > the duties to keep their e-mails updated, to inform the Secretariat >>>> > and the At-Large Staff of any change in same or in the names of said >>>> > representatives. >>>> > >>>> > Just a wording change here - emails should be changed to email >>>> > addresses >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > The removal of the text referring to LACRALO operating by consensus is >>>> > against the values and principles of ICANN, which operates by >>>> > consensus in all its activities, and I strongly request that it be >>>> > retained. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Chair, Vice Chair, Secretariat, Vice Seecretariat, ALAC >>>> > representatives, alternates, and Board. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > This is patently ridiculous. The creation of a THIRTEEN member Board >>>> > of LACRALO is unnecessary, overly bureaucratic and unworkable. I >>>> > suggest this entire modification be stricken. >>>> > >>>> > Diversity requirements shall not be applicable among incumbent and >>>> > alternate members with respect to each other. >>>> > >>>> > I totally disagree. Diversity requirements are needed to balance the >>>> > voices of the much larger Latin American sub-region with the much >>>> > smaller Caribbean region. Removal of diversity requirements will leave >>>> > the smaller countries of the Caribbean without a voice in LACRALO. >>>> > >>>> > In the case of the election, the affiliation, residency and >>>> > nationality coincidence of same with the ALS country represented, >>>> > shall also be taken into account with respect to the person acting as >>>> > a >>>> > representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC [sic] appointed by the >>>> > Nominating Committee >>>> > (NOMCOM) >>>> > >>>> > This is counter to the ICANN bylaws governing the NomCom. The >>>> > Nominating Committee reports only to the Board, and has extreme >>>> > latitude in determining who they select. Additionally, the NomCom does >>>> > not select any representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC. The >>>> > NomCom selects appointees to the ALAC from specific regions, including >>>> > the LAC, to act on behalf of ICANN and ALAC, in their capacity as >>>> > individuals. These individuals are NOT selected to act on behalf of >>>> > the LAC, and far less the LACRALO, hence the nationality of the person >>>> > chosen should have no bearing on the diversity requirements within the >>>> > LACRALO.The language of this paragraph shows a serious >>>> > misunderstanding of, or disagreement with, the Bylaw-mandated role of >>>> > the NomCom. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > . Each of >>>> > these representatives shall have an alternate with the same powers as >>>> > the incumbent in the event of resignation, absence, inability, >>>> > incompatibilities or decease of the latter. Each incumbent and >>>> > alternate shall be elected in the same election. For the purpose of >>>> > better continuity in the discussion of policies, said representatives >>>> > shall be renewed every other term, one representative having to be >>>> > elected each year >>>> > Text note: Should be former in line 2, not latter. >>>> > This is, I believe contrary to ICANNs by-laws. LACRALO cannot simply >>>> > create an alternate & send them to an ALAC meeting as representative >>>> > with the same powers as the incumbent in the event of resignation, >>>> > absence, inability, incompatibilities or decease of the latter. The >>>> > rules for representatives to ALAC are clear and stated in the ICANN >>>> > bylaws. >>>> > >>>> > What I believe LACRALO can do is select an alternate in case of >>>> > resignation, death or any other reason that the ALAC rep cannot >>>> > fulfill the term, and submit that name to the ALAC in that case. >>>> > However, until and unless those circumstances arise, the alternate as >>>> > elected by LACRALO cannot have the same powers as the incumbent in >>>> > the event of resignation, absence, inability, incompatibilities or >>>> > decease of the latter, as such powers are granted by ALAC, and cannot >>>> > be granted by LACRALO. >>>> > >>>> > This proposal is basically a massive overreach on the part of LACRALO, >>>> > to usurp the powers granted in the ICANN bylaws to ALAC. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > These five Policy Directors shall be selected by the Board members >>>> > elected by the General Assembly. Each of them shall be entitled to one >>>> > vote and decisions shall be taken by simple majority. >>>> > >>>> > Unnecessary, bureaucratic and undemocratic. This proposes a Board, >>>> > created with no diversity requirement, in which over one-third of the >>>> > members are hand-picked by the other members. If this is not obvious >>>> > to all as the creation of a cabal, then ideas of good governance are >>>> > sorely lacking. >>>> > >>>> > First Temporary Provision. The modifications established with the >>>> > present reform, will be >>>> > considered applicable to the terms of the current Chair and >>>> > Secretariat of LACRALO, which are in power at the time of approval of >>>> > these modifications by LACRALOs General Assembly. >>>> > >>>> > This is contrary to all notions of good governance. >>>> > >>>> > Second Temporary Provision. The Board of LACRALO shall be constituted >>>> > from the first election to be conducted immediately after these >>>> > modifications are approved. >>>> > >>>> > Having strongly disagreed with the formation of the Board, it is >>>> > obvious I will disagree with this proposal. >>>> > >>>> > For the purposes of constituting the first Board of LACRALO, those >>>> > positions that have already been put to vote, it having been >>>> > impossible to elect their respective alternates, shall be responsible >>>> > for selecting their respective alternates for one time only. >>>> > >>>> > Setting up for corruption and cabal-ism. NO. >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > Jacqueline A. Morris >>>> > Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and >>>> > Free. (after Chris Lehmann ) >>>> > >>>> > _______________________________________________ >>>> > lac-discuss-en mailing list >>>> > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> lac-discuss-en mailing list >>>> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com >>> >>> > > > -- > natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/4a71da340c.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda
by natalia.enciso＠gmail.com March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda De: natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com Querida Jaqueline, lo siento si suena agresivo, no era mi intención. Podría ser un error de interpretación. Estoy tratando de poner las cosas en orden en mi oficina antes de viajar, eso es razón por la que acaba de enviar un mensaje rápido. Si estamos expresando nuestros sentimientos también me sentí ofende al decir que son ignorantes. Lamento que esto está sucediendo. Me sentí discriminado porque yo `t de la el principio que no puedo tener y expresar mi opinión. I don `t saber quién le preguntaron sobre los comentarios, pero lo que Fátima era el enviado propuesta para debatir en la Asamblea General que, de acuerdo a la retinopatía del prematuro es la adecuada lugar para hacer esto. Tenga cuidado, Natalia 03/05/2012 Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> > Does Rule 11 apply to comments requested on a proposal? > I was asked, as were we all, to comment on the draft as sent by Sylvia. I > took my time, considered carefully and thoughtfully, and, like Vanda, and > others, sent my comments as requested. > I really didn't expect such a quick reply, which suggests that my comments > were not as studied by you as the proposal was studied by me over the past > four days. I also didn't expect the tone, but maybe, given the kind of > messages that have been posted recently, I might have been naive to expect > differently. > Jacqueline > On Mar 5, 2012 6:10 PM, "Natalia Enciso" <natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Please proceed according to rule 11, thanks. >> >> Rule 11 - Resolutions and Amendments >> 11.1 Draft resolutions and amendments may be proposed by the >> participants referred to in Rule 1 and shall be transmitted in >> writing to the Secretariat of the Assembly, which shall circulate >> copies to all participants. >> 11.2 As a general rule, no draft resolution or amendment shall be >> discussed or put to the >> vote unless it has been circulated sufficiently in advance, but in no >> case less than two weeks, to all participants in the working languages of >> the Assembly. >> >> Should a vote in a virtual meeting not be quorate, then the chair shall >> extend the close of the vote for an equal amount of time as the original >> voting period. By the end of this extension, no quorum will be >> required. APPROVED >> >> >> 2012/3/5 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> >> >>> Dear All: >>> Plus 1 to these observations. >>> >>> Plus 1 for the recommendations contained here. >>> >>> - Carlton Samuels >>> >>> ============================== >>> Carlton A Samuels >>> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >>> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >>> ============================= >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jacqueline Morris >>> <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>wrote: >>> >>> > Sorry I have taken so long - I really wanted to do proper research and >>> > make reasoned, logical comments in line with the role of the RALOs, >>> > the values and MSH model of ICANN, and the ALAC improvements. I also >>> > looked at the original emails around the formation of the RALOs to >>> > refresh my memory as to why certain specific clauses were in the >>> > Operating Principles. >>> > >>> > I tried not to make it an academic treatise with loads of references >>> > and footnotes, but I do have them, in case anyone would like to know >>> > more about why I made specific comments. >>> > >>> > Also sorry for the length of the document - I could not make it >>> > shorter, try as I might. >>> > >>> > Comments on the proposal for modification of the LACRALO Operating >>> > Principles and Rules of Procedure >>> > >>> > In general, I believe that the items contained in the proposal are >>> > overly broad and sweeping, will change the entire character of the >>> > LACRALO, and not for the better. They seem designed to create a >>> > massive bureaucratic organisation in which there are almost 30% >>> > chiefs, with few workers, and also seem designed to discard both the >>> > diverse nature of LACRALO and any pretense of democracy that remains >>> > in the organisation. >>> > >>> > To specifics:: >>> > >>> > Paragraph 2: >>> > >>> > This item is designed to allow for rules to be created to allow >>> > individual participation in LACRALO. This is something that has been >>> > in process for five years. Instead of treating with the substantive >>> > theme of this item, increased participation by all end-users in the >>> > region, the proposed modification seeks to insert participation >>> > requirements to limit participation by the ALSes, and ignores the >>> > individual user. >>> > >>> > I suggest that the proposed modification be stricken, and a motion >>> > proposed instead that states: >>> > >>> > Whereas >>> > Individuals who wish to participate in LACRALO are not able to so do >>> > solely because there is no accredited ALS in their country; >>> > We propose that >>> > Any individual seeking to participate must: >>> > be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the LAC >>> > region as defined by ICANN, >>> > not be a member of a certified ALS. >>> > Such individuals will be allowed to join LACRALO as individual >>> > members and participate in LACRALO activities including votes. >>> > Such individuals will be subject to all LACRALO rules and requirements. >>> > >>> > >>> > Along with this, we propose a modification to the text of para 1 of >>> > the Operating Principles: >>> > >>> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >>> > Caribbean accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >>> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >>> > policies >>> > >>> > to >>> > >>> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >>> > Caribbean region as defined by ICANN, as well as qualified individual >>> > members, accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >>> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >>> > policies >>> > >>> > Proposed new text is shown in bold. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > Paragraph 4 >>> > >>> > >>> > This proposal was the most difficult for me to wrap my mind around. To >>> > me, it seemed simply ridiculous. However, I will attempt to break it >>> > down and deal with each item. >>> > >>> > LACRALOs supreme and sovereign governing body will be a General >>> > Assembly. >>> > >>> > This is inconsistent with the actuality of the LACRALO. The LACRALO >>> > only exists inside of and subject to ICANN, via the ALAC. Hence the >>> > insertion of the terms supreme and sovereign just seems ridiculous >>> > to me, and I suggest those terms be stricken and the original language >>> > retained. >>> > >>> > The governing body of the LACRALO will be a General Assembly >>> > >>> > Next: >>> > >>> > Each ALS accredited in the General Assembly will be entitled to one >>> > vote. >>> > >>> > This removes the weighting provision that was specifically imposed to >>> > allow countries with fewer ALSes by virtue of smaller populations to >>> > have a more equitable voice alongside larger countries which may have >>> > many more ALSes. Removal of this provision will lead to capture of the >>> > LACRALO by larger countries, and I strongly object to the removal of >>> > the weighting system, and request that this text be stricken. >>> > >>> > Next: >>> > Said representatives shall also act for the duration of their >>> > appointment as official contacts of the ALS vis-à-vis the LACRALO,with >>> > the duties to keep their e-mails updated, to inform the Secretariat >>> > and the At-Large Staff of any change in same or in the names of said >>> > representatives. >>> > >>> > Just a wording change here - emails should be changed to email >>> > addresses >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > The removal of the text referring to LACRALO operating by consensus is >>> > against the values and principles of ICANN, which operates by >>> > consensus in all its activities, and I strongly request that it be >>> > retained. >>> > >>> > >>> > Chair, Vice Chair, Secretariat, Vice Seecretariat, ALAC >>> > representatives, alternates, and Board. >>> > >>> > >>> > This is patently ridiculous. The creation of a THIRTEEN member Board >>> > of LACRALO is unnecessary, overly bureaucratic and unworkable. I >>> > suggest this entire modification be stricken. >>> > >>> > Diversity requirements shall not be applicable among incumbent and >>> > alternate members with respect to each other. >>> > >>> > I totally disagree. Diversity requirements are needed to balance the >>> > voices of the much larger Latin American sub-region with the much >>> > smaller Caribbean region. Removal of diversity requirements will leave >>> > the smaller countries of the Caribbean without a voice in LACRALO. >>> > >>> > In the case of the election, the affiliation, residency and >>> > nationality coincidence of same with the ALS country represented, >>> > shall also be taken into account with respect to the person acting as >>> > a >>> > representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC [sic] appointed by the >>> > Nominating Committee >>> > (NOMCOM) >>> > >>> > This is counter to the ICANN bylaws governing the NomCom. The >>> > Nominating Committee reports only to the Board, and has extreme >>> > latitude in determining who they select. Additionally, the NomCom does >>> > not select any representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC. The >>> > NomCom selects appointees to the ALAC from specific regions, including >>> > the LAC, to act on behalf of ICANN and ALAC, in their capacity as >>> > individuals. These individuals are NOT selected to act on behalf of >>> > the LAC, and far less the LACRALO, hence the nationality of the person >>> > chosen should have no bearing on the diversity requirements within the >>> > LACRALO.The language of this paragraph shows a serious >>> > misunderstanding of, or disagreement with, the Bylaw-mandated role of >>> > the NomCom. >>> > >>> > >>> > . Each of >>> > these representatives shall have an alternate with the same powers as >>> > the incumbent in the event of resignation, absence, inability, >>> > incompatibilities or decease of the latter. Each incumbent and >>> > alternate shall be elected in the same election. For the purpose of >>> > better continuity in the discussion of policies, said representatives >>> > shall be renewed every other term, one representative having to be >>> > elected each year >>> > Text note: Should be former in line 2, not latter. >>> > This is, I believe contrary to ICANNs by-laws. LACRALO cannot simply >>> > create an alternate & send them to an ALAC meeting as representative >>> > with the same powers as the incumbent in the event of resignation, >>> > absence, inability, incompatibilities or decease of the latter. The >>> > rules for representatives to ALAC are clear and stated in the ICANN >>> > bylaws. >>> > >>> > What I believe LACRALO can do is select an alternate in case of >>> > resignation, death or any other reason that the ALAC rep cannot >>> > fulfill the term, and submit that name to the ALAC in that case. >>> > However, until and unless those circumstances arise, the alternate as >>> > elected by LACRALO cannot have the same powers as the incumbent in >>> > the event of resignation, absence, inability, incompatibilities or >>> > decease of the latter, as such powers are granted by ALAC, and cannot >>> > be granted by LACRALO. >>> > >>> > This proposal is basically a massive overreach on the part of LACRALO, >>> > to usurp the powers granted in the ICANN bylaws to ALAC. >>> > >>> > >>> > These five Policy Directors shall be selected by the Board members >>> > elected by the General Assembly. Each of them shall be entitled to one >>> > vote and decisions shall be taken by simple majority. >>> > >>> > Unnecessary, bureaucratic and undemocratic. This proposes a Board, >>> > created with no diversity requirement, in which over one-third of the >>> > members are hand-picked by the other members. If this is not obvious >>> > to all as the creation of a cabal, then ideas of good governance are >>> > sorely lacking. >>> > >>> > First Temporary Provision. The modifications established with the >>> > present reform, will be >>> > considered applicable to the terms of the current Chair and >>> > Secretariat of LACRALO, which are in power at the time of approval of >>> > these modifications by LACRALOs General Assembly. >>> > >>> > This is contrary to all notions of good governance. >>> > >>> > Second Temporary Provision. The Board of LACRALO shall be constituted >>> > from the first election to be conducted immediately after these >>> > modifications are approved. >>> > >>> > Having strongly disagreed with the formation of the Board, it is >>> > obvious I will disagree with this proposal. >>> > >>> > For the purposes of constituting the first Board of LACRALO, those >>> > positions that have already been put to vote, it having been >>> > impossible to elect their respective alternates, shall be responsible >>> > for selecting their respective alternates for one time only. >>> > >>> > Setting up for corruption and cabal-ism. NO. >>> > >>> > >>> > Jacqueline A. Morris >>> > Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and >>> > Free. (after Chris Lehmann ) >>> > >>> > _______________________________________________ >>> > lac-discuss-en mailing list >>> > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ >>> lac-discuss-en mailing list >>> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com >> >> natalia.enciso @ gmail.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/cd9b13f5b0.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda
by jam＠jacquelinemorris.com March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda De: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com ¿Tiene el artículo 11 se aplican a los comentarios solicitados en una propuesta? Se me pidió, ya que estábamos todos, hacer comentarios sobre el proyecto que fue enviado por Sylvia. Yo tomé mi tiempo, considerado con cuidado y reflexión, y, como Vanda, y otros, envió mis comentarios a lo solicitado. Yo realmente no esperaba una respuesta tan rápida, lo que sugiere que mis comentarios no fueron estudiados por lo que la propuesta fue estudiada por mí en el pasado cuatro días. Yo tampoco esperaba el tono, pero a lo mejor, teniendo en cuenta el tipo de Mensajes que han sido escritos recientemente, que podría haber sido ingenuo esperar diferente. Jacqueline El 05 de marzo 2012 18:10, "Natalia Enciso" <natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com> escribió: > Please proceed according to rule 11, thanks. > > Rule 11 - Resolutions and Amendments > 11.1 Draft resolutions and amendments may be proposed by the > participants referred to in Rule 1 and shall be transmitted in > writing to the Secretariat of the Assembly, which shall circulate > copies to all participants. > 11.2 As a general rule, no draft resolution or amendment shall be > discussed or put to the > vote unless it has been circulated sufficiently in advance, but in no case > less than two weeks, to all participants in the working languages of the > Assembly. > > Should a vote in a virtual meeting not be quorate, then the chair shall > extend the close of the vote for an equal amount of time as the original > voting period. By the end of this extension, no quorum will be > required. APPROVED > > > 2012/3/5 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> > >> Dear All: >> Plus 1 to these observations. >> >> Plus 1 for the recommendations contained here. >> >> - Carlton Samuels >> >> ============================== >> Carlton A Samuels >> Mobile: 876-818-1799 >> *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* >> ============================= >> >> >> On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jacqueline Morris >> <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>wrote: >> >> > Sorry I have taken so long - I really wanted to do proper research and >> > make reasoned, logical comments in line with the role of the RALOs, >> > the values and MSH model of ICANN, and the ALAC improvements. I also >> > looked at the original emails around the formation of the RALOs to >> > refresh my memory as to why certain specific clauses were in the >> > Operating Principles. >> > >> > I tried not to make it an academic treatise with loads of references >> > and footnotes, but I do have them, in case anyone would like to know >> > more about why I made specific comments. >> > >> > Also sorry for the length of the document - I could not make it >> > shorter, try as I might. >> > >> > Comments on the proposal for modification of the LACRALO Operating >> > Principles and Rules of Procedure >> > >> > In general, I believe that the items contained in the proposal are >> > overly broad and sweeping, will change the entire character of the >> > LACRALO, and not for the better. They seem designed to create a >> > massive bureaucratic organisation in which there are almost 30% >> > chiefs, with few workers, and also seem designed to discard both the >> > diverse nature of LACRALO and any pretense of democracy that remains >> > in the organisation. >> > >> > To specifics:: >> > >> > Paragraph 2: >> > >> > This item is designed to allow for rules to be created to allow >> > individual participation in LACRALO. This is something that has been >> > in process for five years. Instead of treating with the substantive >> > theme of this item, increased participation by all end-users in the >> > region, the proposed modification seeks to insert participation >> > requirements to limit participation by the ALSes, and ignores the >> > individual user. >> > >> > I suggest that the proposed modification be stricken, and a motion >> > proposed instead that states: >> > >> > Whereas >> > Individuals who wish to participate in LACRALO are not able to so do >> > solely because there is no accredited ALS in their country; >> > We propose that >> > Any individual seeking to participate must: >> > be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the LAC >> > region as defined by ICANN, >> > not be a member of a certified ALS. >> > Such individuals will be allowed to join LACRALO as individual >> > members and participate in LACRALO activities including votes. >> > Such individuals will be subject to all LACRALO rules and requirements. >> > >> > >> > Along with this, we propose a modification to the text of para 1 of >> > the Operating Principles: >> > >> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >> > Caribbean accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >> > policies >> > >> > to >> > >> > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the >> > Caribbean region as defined by ICANN, as well as qualified individual >> > members, accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure >> > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN >> > policies >> > >> > Proposed new text is shown in bold. >> > >> > >> > >> > Paragraph 4 >> > >> > >> > This proposal was the most difficult for me to wrap my mind around. To >> > me, it seemed simply ridiculous. However, I will attempt to break it >> > down and deal with each item. >> > >> > LACRALOs supreme and sovereign governing body will be a General >> > Assembly. >> > >> > This is inconsistent with the actuality of the LACRALO. The LACRALO >> > only exists inside of and subject to ICANN, via the ALAC. Hence the >> > insertion of the terms supreme and sovereign just seems ridiculous >> > to me, and I suggest those terms be stricken and the original language >> > retained. >> > >> > The governing body of the LACRALO will be a General Assembly >> > >> > Next: >> > >> > Each ALS accredited in the General Assembly will be entitled to one >> > vote. >> > >> > This removes the weighting provision that was specifically imposed to >> > allow countries with fewer ALSes by virtue of smaller populations to >> > have a more equitable voice alongside larger countries which may have >> > many more ALSes. Removal of this provision will lead to capture of the >> > LACRALO by larger countries, and I strongly object to the removal of >> > the weighting system, and request that this text be stricken. >> > >> > Next: >> > Said representatives shall also act for the duration of their >> > appointment as official contacts of the ALS vis-à-vis the LACRALO,with >> > the duties to keep their e-mails updated, to inform the Secretariat >> > and the At-Large Staff of any change in same or in the names of said >> > representatives. >> > >> > Just a wording change here - emails should be changed to email >> > addresses >> > >> > >> > >> > The removal of the text referring to LACRALO operating by consensus is >> > against the values and principles of ICANN, which operates by >> > consensus in all its activities, and I strongly request that it be >> > retained. >> > >> > >> > Chair, Vice Chair, Secretariat, Vice Seecretariat, ALAC >> > representatives, alternates, and Board. >> > >> > >> > This is patently ridiculous. The creation of a THIRTEEN member Board >> > of LACRALO is unnecessary, overly bureaucratic and unworkable. I >> > suggest this entire modification be stricken. >> > >> > Diversity requirements shall not be applicable among incumbent and >> > alternate members with respect to each other. >> > >> > I totally disagree. Diversity requirements are needed to balance the >> > voices of the much larger Latin American sub-region with the much >> > smaller Caribbean region. Removal of diversity requirements will leave >> > the smaller countries of the Caribbean without a voice in LACRALO. >> > >> > In the case of the election, the affiliation, residency and >> > nationality coincidence of same with the ALS country represented, >> > shall also be taken into account with respect to the person acting as >> > a >> > representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC [sic] appointed by the >> > Nominating Committee >> > (NOMCOM) >> > >> > This is counter to the ICANN bylaws governing the NomCom. The >> > Nominating Committee reports only to the Board, and has extreme >> > latitude in determining who they select. Additionally, the NomCom does >> > not select any representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC. The >> > NomCom selects appointees to the ALAC from specific regions, including >> > the LAC, to act on behalf of ICANN and ALAC, in their capacity as >> > individuals. These individuals are NOT selected to act on behalf of >> > the LAC, and far less the LACRALO, hence the nationality of the person >> > chosen should have no bearing on the diversity requirements within the >> > LACRALO.The language of this paragraph shows a serious >> > misunderstanding of, or disagreement with, the Bylaw-mandated role of >> > the NomCom. >> > >> > >> > . Each of >> > these representatives shall have an alternate with the same powers as >> > the incumbent in the event of resignation, absence, inability, >> > incompatibilities or decease of the latter. Each incumbent and >> > alternate shall be elected in the same election. For the purpose of >> > better continuity in the discussion of policies, said representatives >> > shall be renewed every other term, one representative having to be >> > elected each year >> > Text note: Should be former in line 2, not latter. >> > This is, I believe contrary to ICANNs by-laws. LACRALO cannot simply >> > create an alternate & send them to an ALAC meeting as representative >> > with the same powers as the incumbent in the event of resignation, >> > absence, inability, incompatibilities or decease of the latter. The >> > rules for representatives to ALAC are clear and stated in the ICANN >> > bylaws. >> > >> > What I believe LACRALO can do is select an alternate in case of >> > resignation, death or any other reason that the ALAC rep cannot >> > fulfill the term, and submit that name to the ALAC in that case. >> > However, until and unless those circumstances arise, the alternate as >> > elected by LACRALO cannot have the same powers as the incumbent in >> > the event of resignation, absence, inability, incompatibilities or >> > decease of the latter, as such powers are granted by ALAC, and cannot >> > be granted by LACRALO. >> > >> > This proposal is basically a massive overreach on the part of LACRALO, >> > to usurp the powers granted in the ICANN bylaws to ALAC. >> > >> > >> > These five Policy Directors shall be selected by the Board members >> > elected by the General Assembly. Each of them shall be entitled to one >> > vote and decisions shall be taken by simple majority. >> > >> > Unnecessary, bureaucratic and undemocratic. This proposes a Board, >> > created with no diversity requirement, in which over one-third of the >> > members are hand-picked by the other members. If this is not obvious >> > to all as the creation of a cabal, then ideas of good governance are >> > sorely lacking. >> > >> > First Temporary Provision. The modifications established with the >> > present reform, will be >> > considered applicable to the terms of the current Chair and >> > Secretariat of LACRALO, which are in power at the time of approval of >> > these modifications by LACRALOs General Assembly. >> > >> > This is contrary to all notions of good governance. >> > >> > Second Temporary Provision. The Board of LACRALO shall be constituted >> > from the first election to be conducted immediately after these >> > modifications are approved. >> > >> > Having strongly disagreed with the formation of the Board, it is >> > obvious I will disagree with this proposal. >> > >> > For the purposes of constituting the first Board of LACRALO, those >> > positions that have already been put to vote, it having been >> > impossible to elect their respective alternates, shall be responsible >> > for selecting their respective alternates for one time only. >> > >> > Setting up for corruption and cabal-ism. NO. >> > >> > >> > Jacqueline A. Morris >> > Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and >> > Free. (after Chris Lehmann ) >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > lac-discuss-en mailing list >> > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en >> > > > > -- > natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com > > [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/78022eca0a.html --]]

1 0

Re: [lac-discuss-es] Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda
by natalia.enciso＠gmail.com March 5, 2012

March 5, 2012

[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Mis comentarios relacionados con la enmienda De: natalia.enciso(a)gmail.com Por favor proceda de acuerdo a la regla 11, gracias. Artículo 11 - Resoluciones y enmiendas 11.1 Los proyectos de resolución y las enmiendas pueden ser propuestas por el los participantes a que se refiere el Artículo 1 que se transmitirá en escrito a la Secretaría de la Asamblea, que distribuirá copias a todos los participantes. 11.2 Por regla general, ningún proyecto de resolución o enmienda podrá discutirse a o sometida a votar, a menos que haya sido comunicado con suficiente antelación, pero en ningún caso menos de dos semanas, a todos los participantes en las lenguas de trabajo de la Asamblea. ¿No debería un voto en una reunión virtual válidamente constituida, entonces el Presidente de la Junta extender el cierre de la votación para una misma cantidad de tiempo que el original período de votación. Al final de esta extensión, hay quórum será necesario. APROBADO 03/05/2012 Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels(a)gmail.com> > Dear All: > Plus 1 to these observations. > > Plus 1 for the recommendations contained here. > > - Carlton Samuels > > ============================== > Carlton A Samuels > Mobile: 876-818-1799 > *Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* > ============================= > > > On Mon, Mar 5, 2012 at 3:58 PM, Jacqueline Morris > <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>wrote: > > > Sorry I have taken so long - I really wanted to do proper research and > > make reasoned, logical comments in line with the role of the RALOs, > > the values and MSH model of ICANN, and the ALAC improvements. I also > > looked at the original emails around the formation of the RALOs to > > refresh my memory as to why certain specific clauses were in the > > Operating Principles. > > > > I tried not to make it an academic treatise with loads of references > > and footnotes, but I do have them, in case anyone would like to know > > more about why I made specific comments. > > > > Also sorry for the length of the document - I could not make it > > shorter, try as I might. > > > > Comments on the proposal for modification of the LACRALO Operating > > Principles and Rules of Procedure > > > > In general, I believe that the items contained in the proposal are > > overly broad and sweeping, will change the entire character of the > > LACRALO, and not for the better. They seem designed to create a > > massive bureaucratic organisation in which there are almost 30% > > chiefs, with few workers, and also seem designed to discard both the > > diverse nature of LACRALO and any pretense of democracy that remains > > in the organisation. > > > > To specifics:: > > > > Paragraph 2: > > > > This item is designed to allow for rules to be created to allow > > individual participation in LACRALO. This is something that has been > > in process for five years. Instead of treating with the substantive > > theme of this item, increased participation by all end-users in the > > region, the proposed modification seeks to insert participation > > requirements to limit participation by the ALSes, and ignores the > > individual user. > > > > I suggest that the proposed modification be stricken, and a motion > > proposed instead that states: > > > > Whereas > > Individuals who wish to participate in LACRALO are not able to so do > > solely because there is no accredited ALS in their country; > > We propose that > > Any individual seeking to participate must: > > be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the LAC > > region as defined by ICANN, > > not be a member of a certified ALS. > > Such individuals will be allowed to join LACRALO as individual > > members and participate in LACRALO activities including votes. > > Such individuals will be subject to all LACRALO rules and requirements. > > > > > > Along with this, we propose a modification to the text of para 1 of > > the Operating Principles: > > > > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the > > Caribbean accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure > > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN > > policies > > > > to > > > > 1. The LACRALO is composed of the ALSs of Latin America and the > > Caribbean region as defined by ICANN, as well as qualified individual > > members, accredited by the ALAC as a mechanism to promote and ensure > > participation by regional users in the process of developing ICANN > > policies > > > > Proposed new text is shown in bold. > > > > > > > > Paragraph 4 > > > > > > This proposal was the most difficult for me to wrap my mind around. To > > me, it seemed simply ridiculous. However, I will attempt to break it > > down and deal with each item. > > > > LACRALOs supreme and sovereign governing body will be a General > > Assembly. > > > > This is inconsistent with the actuality of the LACRALO. The LACRALO > > only exists inside of and subject to ICANN, via the ALAC. Hence the > > insertion of the terms supreme and sovereign just seems ridiculous > > to me, and I suggest those terms be stricken and the original language > > retained. > > > > The governing body of the LACRALO will be a General Assembly > > > > Next: > > > > Each ALS accredited in the General Assembly will be entitled to one > > vote. > > > > This removes the weighting provision that was specifically imposed to > > allow countries with fewer ALSes by virtue of smaller populations to > > have a more equitable voice alongside larger countries which may have > > many more ALSes. Removal of this provision will lead to capture of the > > LACRALO by larger countries, and I strongly object to the removal of > > the weighting system, and request that this text be stricken. > > > > Next: > > Said representatives shall also act for the duration of their > > appointment as official contacts of the ALS vis-à-vis the LACRALO,with > > the duties to keep their e-mails updated, to inform the Secretariat > > and the At-Large Staff of any change in same or in the names of said > > representatives. > > > > Just a wording change here - emails should be changed to email > > addresses > > > > > > > > The removal of the text referring to LACRALO operating by consensus is > > against the values and principles of ICANN, which operates by > > consensus in all its activities, and I strongly request that it be > > retained. > > > > > > Chair, Vice Chair, Secretariat, Vice Seecretariat, ALAC > > representatives, alternates, and Board. > > > > > > This is patently ridiculous. The creation of a THIRTEEN member Board > > of LACRALO is unnecessary, overly bureaucratic and unworkable. I > > suggest this entire modification be stricken. > > > > Diversity requirements shall not be applicable among incumbent and > > alternate members with respect to each other. > > > > I totally disagree. Diversity requirements are needed to balance the > > voices of the much larger Latin American sub-region with the much > > smaller Caribbean region. Removal of diversity requirements will leave > > the smaller countries of the Caribbean without a voice in LACRALO. > > > > In the case of the election, the affiliation, residency and > > nationality coincidence of same with the ALS country represented, > > shall also be taken into account with respect to the person acting as > > a > > representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC [sic] appointed by the > > Nominating Committee > > (NOMCOM) > > > > This is counter to the ICANN bylaws governing the NomCom. The > > Nominating Committee reports only to the Board, and has extreme > > latitude in determining who they select. Additionally, the NomCom does > > not select any representative vis-à-vis ALAC on behalf of LAC. The > > NomCom selects appointees to the ALAC from specific regions, including > > the LAC, to act on behalf of ICANN and ALAC, in their capacity as > > individuals. These individuals are NOT selected to act on behalf of > > the LAC, and far less the LACRALO, hence the nationality of the person > > chosen should have no bearing on the diversity requirements within the > > LACRALO.The language of this paragraph shows a serious > > misunderstanding of, or disagreement with, the Bylaw-mandated role of > > the NomCom. > > > > > > . Each of > > these representatives shall have an alternate with the same powers as > > the incumbent in the event of resignation, absence, inability, > > incompatibilities or decease of the latter. Each incumbent and > > alternate shall be elected in the same election. For the purpose of > > better continuity in the discussion of policies, said representatives > > shall be renewed every other term, one representative having to be > > elected each year > > Text note: Should be former in line 2, not latter. > > This is, I believe contrary to ICANNs by-laws. LACRALO cannot simply > > create an alternate & send them to an ALAC meeting as representative > > with the same powers as the incumbent in the event of resignation, > > absence, inability, incompatibilities or decease of the latter. The > > rules for representatives to ALAC are clear and stated in the ICANN > > bylaws. > > > > What I believe LACRALO can do is select an alternate in case of > > resignation, death or any other reason that the ALAC rep cannot > > fulfill the term, and submit that name to the ALAC in that case. > > However, until and unless those circumstances arise, the alternate as > > elected by LACRALO cannot have the same powers as the incumbent in > > the event of resignation, absence, inability, incompatibilities or > > decease of the latter, as such powers are granted by ALAC, and cannot > > be granted by LACRALO. > > > > This proposal is basically a massive overreach on the part of LACRALO, > > to usurp the powers granted in the ICANN bylaws to ALAC. > > > > > > These five Policy Directors shall be selected by the Board members > > elected by the General Assembly. Each of them shall be entitled to one > > vote and decisions shall be taken by simple majority. > > > > Unnecessary, bureaucratic and undemocratic. This proposes a Board, > > created with no diversity requirement, in which over one-third of the > > members are hand-picked by the other members. If this is not obvious > > to all as the creation of a cabal, then ideas of good governance are > > sorely lacking. > > > > First Temporary Provision. The modifications established with the > > present reform, will be > > considered applicable to the terms of the current Chair and > > Secretariat of LACRALO, which are in power at the time of approval of > > these modifications by LACRALOs General Assembly. > > > > This is contrary to all notions of good governance. > > > > Second Temporary Provision. The Board of LACRALO shall be constituted > > from the first election to be conducted immediately after these > > modifications are approved. > > > > Having strongly disagreed with the formation of the Board, it is > > obvious I will disagree with this proposal. > > > > For the purposes of constituting the first Board of LACRALO, those > > positions that have already been put to vote, it having been > > impossible to elect their respective alternates, shall be responsible > > for selecting their respective alternates for one time only. > > > > Setting up for corruption and cabal-ism. NO. > > > > > > Jacqueline A. Morris > > Technology should be like oxygen: Ubiquitous, Necessary, Invisible and > > Free. (after Chris Lehmann ) > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lac-discuss-en mailing list > > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > > > _______________________________________________ > lac-discuss-en mailing list > lac-discuss-en(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en > natalia.enciso @ gmail.com _______________________________________________ [[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/baed0cc1b1.html --]]

1 0