[ALAC] [ALAC-Internal] ALAC in an evolving ICANN.

[Avri Doria]

On 5 Jul 2012, at 12:04, JJS wrote:

> *3) There is no consensus on preferred structures. Some suggest that the
> lines of responsibility be integrated into the Executive Committee; others
> call for such lines to be led by individuals not necessarily seated on the
> ExeCom; yet others remark that such a task would provide the ideal level
> for the involvement of RALOs. Most comments dwell on the fact that the
> choice of a title (e.g. Vice Chair) is far less important than reliably
> performing a function (e.g. Community, which requires a stable,
> identifiable lead). A minority calls for a regional balance in leading the
> lines of responsibility, but most consider that regional balance is best
> achieved in other ways in ALAC.*


In looking at the needs over time and the fact that the structure needs to be simple and flexible, I think picking any one configuration can be difficult, unless it is the most basic.

I think that the multi-region nature of ALAC is critical and the most basic.  If the ExecComm has real function then its structure needs to be representative of the regions. I think it would be problematic to not consider this.  Perhaps the reason only a minority spoke up to support is because they all thought it was basic and a given.

I think the necessary functions can vary over time; the 3 you have seem right, but there may be others and they may need to be split  between a few people in times of great pressure. I beleive that the ExecComm should have the flexibility to assign the roles as needed, including reaching beyond and including observers if necessary - if (e.g. hypothetical) the IANA Political Crisis of 2015 is incredibly knotty and requires a single point of focus for ExecComm activities, the ExecComm should be able to decide in the regionally balanced ExecComm how to do this.

avri