[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: mis comentarios relacionados con la Enmienda De: cintra.sooknanan@gmail.com Estimado Vanda, Gracias por su contribución y observaciones. Tal vez esta discusión también dará lugar a una reforma de la forma en la Ley por Grupo de Trabajo ha estado operando de manera que produzca resultados tangibles, en lugar del secreto y la tergiversación. Saludos cordiales Cintra El Sol, 04 de marzo 2012 a las 12:12 PM, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br> escribió:

Well, my comments where based on the assumption that all the WG members were aware of the proposal, and agreed with it. If there is no such internal agreement than better to put over the table all other proposals too, at least to be fair, but especially to follow the principles under ICANN. Cintra, your proposal to invite the opinion of the At Large's Regional Coordination Team, looks very positive in my opinion and I encourage the WG, you include to do so! Best and Abrazos a tout

-----Mensagem original----- De: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Cintra Sooknanan Enviada em: domingo, 4 de março de 2012 11:19 Para: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: Heidi Ullrich; ICANN At-Large Staff; lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Assunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] [lac-discuss-en] my comments related the ammendment

Greetings Lacralo,

Upon review of the proposals I must express my displeasure with the drafting which totally disregards the proposals made by Caribbean ALSes both publicly on the list and calls, and internally to the By Law Modification Working Group. The fact that our point of view was not captured in this document demonstrates clearly that the drafter was not objective and only chose to represent the proposals of herself and a segment of Lacralo. Was this action meant to fraction our relations and sideline my sub-region further, or is it simply a matter of ignorance on the part of the writer? I ask you to consider the answer.

This proposed vision of the new Lacralo is an administrative blunder. It is top heavy, disregards diversity, usurps the role of ALAC and ICANN, has no mechanisms for encouraging Participation and shows a clear lack of understanding of the responsibility of elected members. I am heartened by Vanda's contribution and hopeful that this wisdom will be heeded. I also wish to make a formal request that in moving forward with any structural Lacralo changes that we seek advice from our At Large's Regional Coordination Team, who are well experienced and knowledgeable in this area, having overseen structural changes in other Ralos.

By way of background I have been on this working group since the Cartagena meeting in 2010 and this is the first time there has been any indication of the formation of a board of directors. It is alarming to me that it has been put to Lacralo without any discussion and represented as the work of the By Law Modification Working Group. In fact, while I am in agreement with Vanda's points, I differ in opinion on her point 10) which refers to the Lacralo Directory Board. I request the writer of these proposals to explain the reasoning behind the Lacralo Directory Board and as a matter of urgency to save her reputation by sending a revised draft of proposals which captures ALL the amendments proposed by the By Law Modification Working Group.

Thank you

Cintra Sooknanan

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 6:39 PM, <vanda@uol.com.br> wrote:

...

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

Subject: my comments related the ammendment From: vanda@uol.com.br

Here my analysis to share with you all related to the Proposal Amendments. I am not sure my due if I commit with NOMCOMM will will be Able to Participate in all sessions, so I Decided to share my opinions are With All of you.

Point I have something to say in highlight below.

Thanks

VANDA

Points Proposed by one group

My comments

1) the right to vote in ALSes of affairs LACRALO Determined by a minimum level of participation

This is positive

2) working languages \u200b\u200bFrench and Portuguese expanded to

I dont see need and may be too expensive. But this is not a main concern '. (But I dont see APRALO working in the more than 20 languages \u200b\u200bThey Have there

3) Removes the concept of operating by consensus > From my point of view this is one of ICANNs Principle Against build consensus

4) creation of Vice President

Those persons can not be added to the normal representation without at ALAC the decision of ALAC itself. Not for LACRALO to decide. See also below on item 8

5) terms of President and Vice President for two terms of eligible 2 Each years

This make some sense, since representation in ALAC Demands Some degree of learning, so one year is short term indeed. But the second term Shall Be one year to allow Others to Participate.

6) creation position of Vice Secretariat

Same vice president of

7) LACRALO would serve to elect 2 persons and 2 Others on ALAC as Their

respective alternates (diversity not apply to Marshall Requirements 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, Neither is not safe for the Democratic organization. (Imagine if the two Mexico and Brazil big country clubs decide to make a strong movement to take over this group, can be all the control positions) really not safe. Must Have diversity.

8) The alternate or deputy can assume the ALAC rep in case of Any Inability of the primary ALAC rep

I Believe This Shall be submitted to ALAC, We can not decide the next time member sat to ALAC meeting is another

9) the ALAC member can be re-Elected for a two year term 2nd

Reelection has the Same Principle 1 year for second term to allow Others to Participate.

10) creation of a LACRALO LACRALO Directory Board with administrative or and operative functions. This will Comprise the persons Elected in LACRALO (President, Vice-President, Secretary, Deputy Secretary, the two LACRALO Elected Representatives and Their alternates to ALAC) and five Policy Directors who would lead Different working groups within The LACRALO and in Selecting members within The charge of Their working groups.Policy Directors would be Elected by the General Assembly by simple Majority.

In my opinion This Will mean too much and not generals to command Troops Impact but no at all.

3 would be good one member of Caribbean region and two from Latin region too keep at Same Time diversity and be reasonable (there is no members that really works much in so I dont LACRALO believe it will be enough groups to work under 5 policy directors). But not so relevant

11) Establishing elections can take place That Virtually

This is good, but needs clear tools available to Avoid Must be one member to vote for all the ALS under ITS command - Allow This only after check the security of the tool.

12) Amendments would be applicable to Existing mandates of President, Secretary

I am not in behalf of That, only if WAS To Have Just One More year term.

Application of the change in benefice of the Existing Elected members looks manipulation.

Same people can be candidate and be Elected, But Extending the mandate, looks not Democratic. Thats the way ditactors use to keeping in place Totally Against.

13) The constitution of the Board of LACRALO be Held after the first Immediately election to be Held at the time of These Amendments be approved.

Not so relevant.

Vanda Scartezini

Acesse: http://nomcom.icann.org and candidate-it!

Access: http://nomcom.icann.org and apply!

Polo Consulting Associates

IT Trend

Alameda Santos 1470 conj. 1407

01418-903 So Paulo, SP, Brazil

Tel + 5511 3266.6253

Mob + 55118181.1464

Dissemine this idia:

Enter or domain ao telefone do research.

Domain dialing

Descrio: Descrio: Siter-16-square.png <http://www.siter.com> www.siter.com

[[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/2f5b293b75.html --]]