Duties and Metrics Drafting Team
Monday 08 Ocotber 2012 at 2000 UTC
Summary Minutes and Action Items
1. Roll call; Staff
AG: This is our last meeting before Toronto, we need to review what has been done in our ROP. The real issue is to get any feedback prior to 2 days from now. At this point I believe I have capture pretty much what has been said.
The are 2 things highlighted. The real substantive part is what have we forgotten to talk about all together.?
I am worried that there may be things that we did not talk about.
We are looking for everyone to have read the document. Is there anything wrong/missing?
We have a lot more content.
1.10: Current title: Position description for ALAC members/ALAC liasions. I would suggest that the ALAC revise the document to at least review the title.
The position description, the ALAC in synchornization revise that document.
All capitalized words will be in the definition session.
Eduardo: Are you suggesting to look at this doc in Toronto?
Alan: I do not want to add it to the Toronto Agenda if its not absolutely crucial.
Recalling a vote: CLO . AG: We already have the mechanism, should we choose.
Issue of Thresholds whereby an ALAC member can be removed:
1. Under normal votes if a lot of people abstain, this decision can be made by a small number of people.
Holly: There must be a % of positive vote. Effect: That is treating an abstention as no.
CLO: I disagree with treating abstention as no. I think we should say 2/3 of ALAC. I would not equate abstentions to no. It is confusing and it is clear that if we do that rule, then you have bad results.
AG: By "sitting" I mean that the # of people that there are as of today in the ALAC.
CLO: If you do not count abstentions as yes/no you have the risk of abstention being a no.
AG: For the outcome to be the person being dismissed. 2/3 of 14th vote to dismiss.
AG: I do not believe that the ALAC is ever going to use this procedure.
How many people believe that we should require 10 people to remove someone?
AG: I have heard a couple of comments that we do not allow objections. Everyone else has agreed that we allow abstentions.
This has the effect of treating abstentions as of no.
Tijani: I prefer not to put 10. 1.4 is included in 1.6
1.5:
1.9: "or otherwise ensure....."
AG: When people cannot do their job due to sickness, etc.
Yaovi:
1.9 : Happy with this one.
AG: Concern was the last part of it. I was trying to make sure someone was not going to resign and we know that sometimes people cannot meet the requirements.
Tijani: 2.2 Uncomfortable with this.
AG: The current Chair was elected under those rules.
The ALAC still has to vote for that person.
2.2 Includes 2 different concepts which need to be separated.
Tijani: 2.3 : The following formulation is simpler:
A Chair is elected for 1 year automatically relected to 2 [ Tijani to send the precise wording to AG]
ACTION ITEM: Tijani to send precise wording to AG.
Consensus: You participated in the process, if one person disagree it may still be a consensus decision.
3.6: ALAC members occupying the role of VC agree to take over a heavier workload than the untitled ALT Members.
AG: There are confidential decisions which cannot be disclosed.
We need to obbey external confidentiality or not send someone to the group.
AG: Re-iterated and thanked Tijani for what he has done, and all shoud do. Somethings we have discussed a lot, but it is quite clear, if we have any concerns raise them .
----------------------END-----------------------------------------