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

tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org tijani.benjemaa at fmai.org
Wed Oct 12 16:46:17 UTC 2011

I agree with Wolf.
Executive Director
Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations
Phone : + 216 70 825 231
Mobile : + 216 98 330 114
Fax     : + 216 70 825 231

-----Message d'origine-----
De : alac-excom-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-excom-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Wolf
Envoyé : mercredi 12 octobre 2011 16:57
À : Evan Leibovitch; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Cc : lac-discuss-en at atlarge-lists.icann.org; ALAC EXCOM; At-Large Worldwide
Objet : Re: [ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] ALAC/At-Large Improvements Project --
important update

Hi all,

I share Evan's basic question: "accountable to who?" and subsequent
considerations. And I would say: In a broader sense to the Internet users in
general, in a causal sense to the regional community that selected them =
the RALOs concerned by such an under-performing candidate should be "in
charge" of any potential "sanction" mechanisms because the two *RALO
selected* ALAC members are - first and foremost - accountable to their
electorate. A defective performance of a regional representative / ALAC
member affects performance and reputation of the particular region and
cannot be in their interest = be tolerated over a certain span of time
(except for serious circumstances such as sickness and the like).

I understand Carlton's reservations against sanctions or punishments of
volunteers but as soon as limited seats (15 or 2 per region) and financial
(travel etc.) resources are associated with a volunteer's engagement, the
mandated person and his community have a special responsibility and
accountability towards ALAC and ICANN. Otherwise, we cannot fulfill our role
and commitments - what we stand for - diligently representing the users at

The key deliberation must be: The standards and professionalism we expect
and demand from others, we must fulfill ourselves at first hand (typical
trap of credibility ;-).


Evan Leibovitch wrote Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:39:
>On 11 October 2011 19:04, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>> Take imaginary example candidate A, ALAC member, does not attend 
>> calls, does not attend meetings, or when he travels, uses their time 
>> outside of the ALAC room. A does not get involved in ALAC & other 
>> working groups. A is basically using their affiliation to ALAC as 
>> something that looks good on their CV. Admittedly, this is an 
>> extreme, but Carlton, at the moment, nothing can be done about that 
>> person, and that imaginary person is occupying a seat on the ALAC, 
>> one of the only 15 seats of people supposed to act in the best 
>> interests of the 2.1Bn Internet users out there. That person is 
>> failing those 2.1Bn people. That person is not accountable.
>I guess the big question -- at least MY big question -- is, accountable 
>to who?
>If that person was sent by a RALO, the RALO should be able to handle 
>this issue through a recall or other similar measure.
>If the person was appointed by the NomCom, the procedure is different 
>but a mechanism is still required. By definition a NomCom ALAC 
>appointee is not accountable to ALAC or the region, however it reflects 
>badly on the NomCom and ICANN itself if non-performing ALAC members are 
>chosen and allowed to under-serve for an entire two-year term.
>What bothers me the most is the prospect of ALAC passing judgment over 
>its own members. If a RALO elects someone who reflects their viewpoint, 
>and that viewpoint is that only a small number of issues matter, this 
>is indeed the RALO's choice to make and ALAC has no right to engage in 
>top-down second-guessing. Education and persuasion, certainly, but not
>I fully agree on requesting that every RALO has some kind of recall 
>mechanism for their elected officials -- not just ALAC members but also 
>RALO chairs, secretariats and liaisons as applicable. Indeed I have 
>long advocated this within my own RALO. I am also greatly in favour of 
>staff's providing attendance and other performance metrics that allow a 
>RALO to act appropriately on factual inputs. But I am very much against 
>any scheme that has ALAC members being accountable to other ALAC members.
>It's bad enough that the ICANN Board has no legal, fiduciary duty to 
>the public, but only to ICANN itself. Let's not justify, let alone 
>propagate that mistake within our own bounds.
>But in any case, this debate is premature. We're at an intermediate
>> stage, with more than 50 recommendations in this report, some of 
>> which are completed, some of which need to be taken to the next 
>> stage. The debate on sanctions/no sanctions will happen later.
>I don't think there's any problem with that. As I've mentioned, it's 
>simply that the wording in the report right now could easily be 
>interpreted by a casual reader to infer that we have already had the 
>discussion, agreed on a regime of sanctions, and are simply discussing 
>appropriate implementation going forward. WE know the debate is 
>incomplete, but that is not what the report indicates.
>- Evan
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: 

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

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org

Profile on LinkedIn
ALAC-ExCom mailing list
ALAC-ExCom at atlarge-lists.icann.org

Aucun virus trouvé dans ce message.
Analyse effectuée par AVG - www.avg.fr
Version: 10.0.1390 / Base de données virale: 1518/3785 - Date: 24/07/2011 La
Base de données des virus a expiré.

More information about the ALAC mailing list