Meetings and Administration Drafting Team (MADT)
Tuesday 04 September 2012 at 1800 UTC
Summary Minutes & Action Items
1. Roll Call and Apologies (staff - 5 minutes)
Roll call was held
2. Introduction (meeting chair / staff / group - 10 minutes)
The introduction was given.
3. Meetings issues (meeting chair / group - 60 minutes)
AG: I would like to highlight the following two items (1) At-Large Rules of Procedure Modification Proposals Template Workspace - https://community.icann.org/x/H4AoAg (2) At-Large Rules of Procedure Process: Meetings and Administration Sandbox - https://community.icann.org/x/_oAoAg
AG: I am posting the results f our meetings on the sandbox. Items in red need follow up/revision.
AG: In the cases of the meetings which we have held, I have going back through the recordings and made sure that all things we have done have had closure or that we will follow up.
AG: The contents of the wiki will be the draft text. The content will come from the meetings though.
AG: When is quorum required? Our rules speak of quorum but that it happens at the beginning of the meeting. Although, in practice, we do have discussions prior to quorum if we believe quorum will happen later in the call.
AG: To carry out a vote we need a simple majority and all regions present.
AG: I don't think we should invalidate the vote because all regions weren't present.
CLO: I know we are trying to keep it simple, but I want to future-proof this.
AG: I am suggesting that a region's decision not to vote does not invalidate the vote. Metrics should be tracking those who do not vote.
AG: On consensus, I noted two things: (1) We should not try to define consensus within the ALAC, but we may need to do in in WGs where representation is not balanced (2) anyone can call for a formal vote if they feel it is needed. Practically, the ALAC should work on consensus rather than formal votes. The exception to this is where it is formally required.
CLO: I agree on the right to any Member to 'Call for a Vote' on any issue.
CLO: I think decision would work well as it captures the decision concept.
CLO: The importance of consensus is the unanimity of the group. There will always be someone who feels that their vote was not recorded, we need to accommodate this at some point. Perhaps there can be formal objections.
SSP: I think it is necessary to record the votes and how each of us vote
AG: For meeting forms and work methods, will a week before be okay?
ED: Yes.
CLO: I think it is important that we do not tie up a future leadership position's ability to act formally just because they were not given enough hours. There may be emergencies.
CLO: It would be useful if the definitions include regular, formal, special and extra ordinary meetings.
AG: I hope that we do not have to define type of meetings but rather to have certain exceptions. For example, we need some notice for example, if we want to change the ROP. We do not want to have some futiure ALAC and we have someone changing the rules in the East vs the West. We need a larger threshold than 50%.
CLO: When we have a general meeting, we have something where we can work.
ED: Can we have a caveat such as " as approved by tHE Chair"
We can waive the notice. AG will craft something and discuss it the next meeting.
SSP: We do need to have at least 2, 3 types of meetings clearly defined such as the ALAC monthly or extraordinary meetings or a meeting to amend the ROP. Issues that have to deal with the organizations have 3 instances.
SS: I think there should be defined instances : ordinaries meetings (once per month ), and ordinarily Assembly and Extraordinary Assembly .
Delineation between the type of meetings.
Dev: Even if something requires extraordinary actions. There should be certain thresholds, would not create so many different levels.
AG: He would like to look at Sergio’s comment.
AG: Do we need to use tools
CLO: APRALO has not access to skype. Email and WKI are available. Advice to technology task force.
AG: Our rules should be flexible enough but not restrictive.
Tijani: What is an "in person' teleconference
We have in person face to face meetings.
AG: Minutes We have meetings in which there are no minutes of who attended.
Do we want to have a section on minutes?
CLO: We can have "Minutes", records and notes
Recording may simply be a recording, we are trying to be very transparent, if we have a convoluted WIKI where nobody can find anything, it is not good enough.
AG: Will put together minimum requirements for what is needed for minutes.
Maureen: Some of the records are quite complete.
They are recorded, apologies are recorded which is important and we do not formalize the minutes.
AG: Records that you see in the meetings have all characteristics, and it depends on the staff person. Some ICANN meetings cannot be found.
CLO: We are doing well because of the past Chairs and staff that we have.
CLO: When we are looking at the drafting of text. In the beginning we had an At Large list where all people had the right to post.
At the moment we have an announce list, which raises awareness. Do you want to put some meat on expectations for emails and WIKIS?
AG: Its something that we can document. We need o specify who is allowed to be on a list. For example former ALAC members could stay. I would not want to put it in the ROP.
CLO: WIKIS do not need to be open to the world. We should have a set of principles somewhere.
Concept of Proxies and Replacements:
We need definitions, we need to look at 2 types of replacements. I am using Proxy only in relation to votes.
Replacement person is someone who can be in a meeting. AG has some thoughts to share.
CLO: This is an important definition, different jurisdiction has different meanings. Example under Australian law, as legal document or for what particular purpose.
ED: If we use proxy only for a vote, then there would not be a problem re quorum. If you are going to be casting a vote for someone for a meeting you count as yourself and the other you represent.
Can I get a proxy for another RALO? For example someone from NARALO for APRALO.?
CLO: A proxy which is a true replacement, can a default go to someone else? Chair?
Another region is fine. But another "member" of the ALAC.
AG: What definition of proxy are you using?
CLO : Proxy is a replacement. Only voting capability is a "Directed proxy" only to vote as directed.
AG: Anyone else on the ALAC the proxy to vote. I have reservation for a full proxy, taking the place for an ALAC member and voting on their behalf. There is an ALAC member how they are chosen. We have a practice that speaking rights are not limited to ALAC members. I am reluctant to give someone not formally appointed to the ALAC the right to act as an ALAC me member.
ED: Replacement proxy: Includes vote.
CLO: One person or 3 people could sit and hold 4 proxies each and that is technically correct.
CLO: You should only be able to give one proxy. It should only be given to another ALAC member.
Sergio: Does not agree with Eduardo. An ALAC member can give the proxy to any member. The possibilities of using votes on proxies would be easier.
AG: If we adopt rules they would significantly increase the possibility to make someone participate and someone can do it for you. This would not be good
AG: Requested a meeting EVERY TWO WEEKS. There is much work to be accomplished.
Thank you all
-------------------END---------------------
