Roberto:
I am aware that the ICANN-69 meeting is using very much of your time - it has been for me more time consuming that I have anticipated, and some prep sessions for the Global IGF are already starting - but I am nevertheless trying to move forward.
Notwithstanding the terminology - please see my earlier message - the question remains on whether a member of a certified At-Large Structure can also have some formal relationship with her/his RALO in own capacity.
I have gone through all the records - email, chat, teleconference log, etc. - and I came to the conclusion that we have a wide majority who agrees in allowing this, although some concern remains about the possibility that this “double membership” could create an unfair advantage. Mostly, these concerns are related to voting, to individuals that are also in a leadership position in their ALSes, or otherwise acquire a status that might create a conflict of interest.
I therefore believe that the question we need to address is not whether a member of an ALS be also a member of a RALO in his/her own capacity but rather under which conditions - and safeguards - this will be allowed. So the real question is not “if” but “how”.
This said, since not everybody has been vocal on the question, and there might be a “silent majority” that I am not accounting for, my idea would be to start a poll asking whether a member of an ALS be also a member of a RALO in his/her own capacity with possible answers being:
Yes, no problem
No, no way
Maybe - the devil is in the details
If we have a consensus for a straight “Yes” or “No” it would be a loss of time to go into details on the whereabout the status as unaffiliated individual will conflict with the status of ALS member. If, on the other hand, as I assume reading the feedback so far, the answer to the poll is a “Maybe”, depending on conditions and safeguards, we can safely start addressing these conditions and safeguards one by one.
Unless I hear a loud and clear opposition - or a different proposal - I will arrange for a poll as described above before the end of the week.
Extra:
As anticipated, I am launching the Doodle poll https://doodle.com/poll/z9ademtqnek62qav [doodle.com] on the question “Can a member of an ALS be also an individual member of a RALO?”. The options are the ones I have anticipated in my earlier message, i.e.:
- Yes, without limitations nor conditions
- Yes, with limitations or conditions
- No
Please feel free to add in the comment field what are the limitations or conditions you would like to apply, in case you choose the middle option. Of course, feel also free to add any comment in case you choose any of the other two.
I am also keeping track of the comments that I have received so far. I propose to give one full week for you to choose one option, and therefore close the poll at 23:59 UTC on Friday, 30 October, so that we can discuss the results and agree on a way forward on the call on the following Monday.
If there is a clear majority for “Yes” or “No”, the matter will be closed. On the other hand, if the result is “Yes, with conditions” we will start the discussion on what conditions we want to apply. Please remember that we are talking now, for the time being, of ALS membership and Individual membership in the same RALO - we will discuss membership in a different RALO at a later time.
