Minutes of Tele-Conference
April 27, 2007
NARALO Telcon
Minutes Taken by: Darlene Thompson
Attending: Darlene Thompson (ALS), Evan Leibovitz (ALS), Luc Faubert (ALS), Gareth Shearman (applicant), Brett Fausett (ALS), Jean Polly (unaffiliated user), Gerry Singleton (ALS), Randy Glass (ALS)
Brett Fausett moderating as Nick Ashton-Hart was missing.
Meeting started at 3:10.
Validation of our NARALO formation schedule by ICANN staff
Brett: We are presently voting on the OP and COC on the NA ALS list. Each accredited ALS has two votes. Darlene: So far 9 have voted with 2 against. Brett: We haven’t set a final date for votes but we should leave it open for about a week. Luc: We need 70% for quorum but two have not been participating much so this might be difficult. Brett: We can’t really act as a group until we have a “group”. We need to ratify the OP and then sign the MOU. Brett: We need to have a procedure for un-certifying an unresponsive ALS. Luc: The OP needs to be approved by 70% of the active ALSs as per the OP. General: There are several ways to classify as “inactive” – postings on the list, registration on the Wiki, try to contact them and get their feedback. Luc: He has definitely done outreach to all to try to get them involved.
Nobody on this call has voted “no” to the OP or COC. So far, we have two unaffiliated (individual) users who have submitted their candidacy on the list as unaffiliated user voting delegates (Jean & Wendy). The two “no” votes that we have raised concerns over the COC that we all pretty much agree on so how can we agree to vote on the amendment? Perhaps we should just wait and see how the voting goes. If we get 70% yeses, then it’s a moot point. If after Tuesday night, we do not have 70%, then maybe we need to make the changes and then revisit.
Why are we allowing 2 reps per ALS? Is it done that way in other regions? It allows unaffiliated individuals to have 2 votes and it also allows for differing opinions coming out of one organization. If an ALS is divided internally, they can then express that through their voting process.
Since we cannot discuss this with the dissenters, there probably isn’t much more to talk about. In regards to the bicameral structure, we should try to get set up as best we can right now and then revisit later (by following the ICANN model for now). Let’s demonstrate that we can get the basics down before we try something new.
Randy: Lets consolidate the wording on the COC so that we can all agree on it and then also add some provisional statements into the OP to state that we are not opposed to more individual representation and will re-visit. Luc: Lets make the changes to the COC right away if we all agree and then re-vote.
Jean: The reason why the “individual” thing is important is because it’s revisited in the MOU (as to whether they are allowed or not) so we should get this nailed down as soon as possible.
The code of conduct is binding but the consequences are not. Some may find this to be a little weird. The main purpose behind this is so that people know that there is a code of conduct and hopefully we never have to use it. Should there be some consultation by the chair to the group if there is a perception of abuse, et al?
Discuss MOU between NARALO and ICANN
The ratification of our MOU is scheduled for May 11. We need to have closure on our OP before moving onto the MOU. ICANN legal will not approve the MOU with the two last paragraphs in there so we will need to revisit/eliminate them. Although there are some battles that we really need to fight, this isn’t one of them.
Brainstorm issues/positions to raise at ICANN San Juan meeting
Luc: We could push to have 5 new voting board members (one from each region) representing individual users. Brett: We will be able to vote on a member of the nominating committee once we get formed. The present person serving has been doing so for the maximum amount of time so we will have to find somebody else.
We need to have a clear picture of who does what in ICANN and who has voting privileges and who is simply an observer. We need to ask ICANN to prepare some kind of orientation document for all ALSs. Luc will post a chart on the composition of the ICANN board.
We need to give ICANN information as to who from each ALS is going to San Juan so that they can make up an “approved delegates” list.
Other business
We need to get “pending” ALSs approved. Apparently there will be a vote on this next week.
