[SPAM] [chapter-delegates] Approaches to fixing the nomination process

[Jacek Gajewski]

Fred and Ramon,

Whether these are seperate NCs or a one joint one is in my opinion the 
secondary matter - although, of course, the seperate NC/category         
                             seems  to be a better solution.
I also agree that  incumbents should be automatically included, if they 
only wish to run for the second term [but there should be some upper 
limit on number of terms they may serve].

However the greatest change should be that NC should only check if the 
candidates fullfil the well defined and known publicly criteria. Their 
major function would be to deselect those, who does not fullfil criteria 
- under no circumstances they should not make a selection between the 
eligible candidates.

One may also give an additional function to NC - they may search for 
additional candidates, who neither were nominated by somebody else, nor 
have selfnominated themselves. May be they were too shy, may be they 
didn't know, may be....whatever. The NC could look for them and ask them 
if they want to candidate together with  those nominated by third 
parties or themselves.

Best regards,
Jacek Gajewski
ISOC-PL

Ramon Morales wrote:

>Fred,
>I believe your insights are excellent and I believe that these measures will
>go a long way to repairing and solidifying the bonds that bring all of us
>together under ISOC. Your idea about separate committees is a measure that
>would allow the process to come closer to the constituents affected. 
>
>The issue of allowing incumbents to run is a democratic standard which we
>use in Puerto Rico and has worked well for us over the last three and one
>half years and over the last two elections.
>
>Way to go, Fred !!!
>
>Ramón Morales
>Chairman
>Internet Society of Puerto Rico
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Fred Baker [mailto:fred at cisco.com] 
>Sent: Friday, April 08, 2005 3:29 PM
>To: chapter-delegates at lists.isoc.org
>Subject: [SPAM] [chapter-delegates] Approaches to fixing the nomination
>process
>
>So I'm listening to the discussion on this list, and trying to figure 
>out what the best way forward is. There are a variety of approaches, 
>some of which call for changes to the ISOC by-laws.
>
>One way to fix the issue being raised is to have several nominating 
>committees. We are doing a Chapter election and an Organizational 
>Member election now, and potentially in the future have an election for 
>paying individual members (whatever they wind up being called). We 
>could literally have a nominating committee for the chapter election 
>whose members are designated by the chapters, a separate nominating 
>committee for the organizational members whose membership is designated 
>by the advisory council, and somehow set up the same kind of thing for 
>the individual members when that comes up.
>
>Another way to approach this would be as someone has suggested - 
>consider incumbents to be nominated de facto and simply have the 
>nominating committee come up with new names to add to the list.
>
>Maybe there are other approaches that folks would like to suggest?
>
>What is apparent is that there is dissatisfaction with the way that the 
>nominating committee works now, so I want to pull something 
>constructive out. A key part of this is going to be a definition of the 
>problem to be solved - not just "we're mad", but some clear statement 
>of the requirements the solution has to solve.
>
>
>
>  
>