[ALAC] ALAC/At-Large Improvements Project -- important update

Wolf Ludwig wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net
Tue Oct 11 13:41:11 UTC 2011

Plus 1 more appreciation for your thoughts and sophisticated orientation
-- thanks a lot, Jean-Jacques!


SAMUELS,Carlton A wrote Mon, 10 Oct 2011 18:14:
>A lot of wisdom distilled here.
>Thank you, Jean Jacques.
>From: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Jacques SUBRENAT [jjs.global at gmail.com]
>Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2011 10:22 PM
>To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; Evan Leibovitch
>Cc: ALAC Working List
>Subject: Re: [ALAC] ALAC/At-Large Improvements Project -- important update
>Hello Olivier, Evan,
>the question is not just about choosing "phase" or "milestone": it should be
>about the way ALAC considers its role within ICANN. Let me offer a few
>1) When to publish? It is common sense that the Final Report should be
>completed before publication. However, 2 separate things should be
>considered here:
>* The legal or formal aspect: General Counsel's office (GCO) is right, and
>common sense would also have it that a report be considered "final" when all
>pending matters have been brought to a close.
>* But more importantly, there is a "political" aspect as well: ALAC should
>assert itself according to its own assessment of ICANN's overall situation,
>and not only in reaction to the ALAC Review WG recommendations or GCO's
>advice on timing. Thus, we should determine if and whether there is a need
>to call the Board's and our community's attention to progress already made,
>challenges ahead, and our timeline.
>2) "Phase" or "milestone"? We need to take a wider and longer-term view of
>things. Yes, At-Large has come a long way from (unfairly) perceived
>irrelevance to being a natural partner. And yes, this progress has been
>achieved by sending the right type of signals (advice requested from ALAC is
>provided in a more professional and timely way, better coordination now
>between different elements of At-Large...). So I would suggest that if we
>want to send something to the Board now, we should do so by placing our
>current work in perspective: step 1 was the ALAC Review WG's
>recommendations, step 2 entailed implementing what could be done quickly,
>step 3 was taking stock of the ATRT's additional layer of recommendations,
>step 4 is where we are at now, and step 5 will be the Final Report. The
>advantage of this (truthful) presentation is that we show we have the bigger
>picture in mind, and that we're already at step 4 out of 5. If necessary, we
>should also point out that, several years after the Board Review WG
>recommendations (e.g. compensation for Directors), some of those latter have
>still not been implemented either, so we're on an equal footing, and will
>not accept people in glass houses throwing stones at us (ALAC members all
>reside in yurts, so there's no risk). IT's high time that the famed
>multi-stakeholder model, which implies equality, be more thoroughly
>implemented within ICANN's ACs and SOs, so that advice from ALAC will be
>considered equivalent to what comes, say, from the GAC.
>3) Make the best use of ICANN-42 in Dakar. From Dakar onwards, the Board
>will go into "sorry I can't look at that now we've got to implement new
>gTLDs and search for the next CEO" mode. So Dakar is our last chance in 2011
>to really get the Board's attention. But what message do we want to deliver?
>IMO, we should use the joint breakfast opportunity to
>* Demonstrate that ALAC, though determined to carry out ongoing obligations
>(implementing the Improvement recommendations, churning out reactive
>advice), is now sufficiently autonomous in its thinking to have its own,
>dynamic agenda (how we expect ALAC's advice to be acted upon by the Board;
>also, I'd be glad to say a few words about our FCWG)
>* Offer to each member of the Board a 2-page résumé of where ALAC stands now
>(we're at step 4 out of 5, what else we do, how we are now organized). The
>idea is that each individual member of the Board should take away from our
>breakfast, a sense that ALAC has indeed matured, and is worthy of being
>From:  Olivier CREPIN-LEBLOND <ocl at gih.com>
>Date:  Sun, 09 Oct 2011 23:35:39 +0200
>To:  Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
>Cc:  ALAC Working List <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject:  Re: [ALAC] ALAC/At-Large Improvements Project -- important update
>> Hello Evan,
>> thanks for your kind suggestion. However, I believe that we are not
>> actually at "phase one" of the At-Large Improvements. The whole process
>> started with the external review report, a few years ago -- and I am not
>> sure what phase we are in since I've not tracked exactly what
>> constitutes a "phase".
>> "Phase one" would convey the wrong idea that we're actually at the very
>> beginning of the process when we're actually closer to its conclusion.
>> IMHO "Milestone" is more neutral.
>> Warm regards,
>> Olivier
>> On 09/10/2011 23:02, Evan Leibovitch wrote :
>>>  Just one suggestion.
>>>  Perhaps, rather than calling this an interim or milestone report, the
>>>  one we submit could be called "phase one". This brings across the
>>>  point that some of the Improvements have been completed and some are
>>>  still in progress.
>>>  A milestone or interim report
>>>  suggests that none of what was started had been completed. This way we
>>>  can say that "phase one" (which includes the bylaw revisions) had been
>>>  completed.
>>>  Comments?
>>>  - Evan (on my mobile)
>>>  On Oct 9, 2011 12:53 PM, "Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond" <ocl at gih.com
>>>  <mailto:ocl at gih.com>> wrote:
>>>      Dear ALAC members,
>>>      I want to inform you of some changes to the Improvements report
>>>      based on
>>>      information Heidi and Seth received. After consulting with ICANN
>>>      Legal,
>>>      it has been suggested that the only "final report" appropriate for
>>>      Board
>>>      approval would come once the ALAC can report having implemented
>>>      *all* the
>>>      recommendations of the ALAC Review WG.
>>>      At this stage, however, we could report that the ALAC has completed a
>>>      substantial amount of ALAC Improvements work, including developing
>>>      specific proposals for the implementation of the ALAC Review WG
>>>      recommendations. Consequently, it was suggested that the current
>>>      status
>>>      report ­ which need only be submitted by staff (not by the ALAC) ­
>>>      not be
>>>      called a ³final report²¹; we are thinking of calling it the
>>>      "ALAC/At-Large
>>>      Improvements Project Milestone Report."
>>>      Still, an endorsement of this Milestone Report by the ALAC would
>>>      send a
>>>      strong message to the Board. So I have instructed Staff to start a
>>>      vote
>>>      endorsing the report on Sunday.
>>>      The next steps in the At-Large Improvements Project will be for
>>>      the ALAC
>>>      to discuss the implementation of the remaining ALAC Review
>>>      recommendations and WT proposals in Dakar, including allocating
>>>      them to
>>>      existing At-Large Working Groups, creating timelines for their
>>>      completion, and determining potential resource implications.
>>>      I would like to be able to submit these details to the Board as
>>>      soon as
>>>      practical but hopefully no later than the meeting in Costa Rica (11-16
>>>      March 2012). The ALAC could then aim to submit the actual final Final
>>>      Report -- marking the completion of the implementation of all
>>>      Improvements recommendations -- to the Board in Prague (24-28 June
>>>      2012).
>>>      Comments/Questions are welcome.
>>>      Seth and others are working to convert the report into a "Milestone"
>>>      report as we speak.
>>>      Best regards,
>>>      Olivier Crépin-Leblond
>>>      ALAC Chair
>>>      _______________________________________________
>>>      ALAC mailing list
>>>      ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>      https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>>>      At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>>>      ALAC Working Wiki:
>>> <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28A
>>> LAC%29>
>> --
>> Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
>> http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> ALAC mailing list
>> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>> ALAC Working Wiki:
>> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)

EuroDIG Secretariat
mobile +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation

Profile on LinkedIn

More information about the ALAC mailing list