[ALAC] Fwd: ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Consolidated Meetings Strategy Proposal

[Carlton Samuels]

Once again, Evan's analysis is spot on; we know the problems and all agree
on the multiple missed opportunities.  I will differ some on the solution.

Maybe I'm a sucker for punishment. And I'm sure we were only intended to be
bit players.  But I'm say words should indict behaviour. I think there is
still an opening to change what might've been a charade into laudable
action.

Yes, I think Intents #1 & #2 as Evan document are still worthy of support.
 Yes, results to date are trending poor.  So let's knock heads together,
engage and find a way to hold ICANN's feet to the fire.

- Carlton

==============================
Carlton A Samuels
Mobile: 876-818-1799
*Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround*
=============================


On Thu, Oct 4, 2012 at 9:33 AM, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> I just posted this on the wiki:
>
> Gone are the days when ICANN would sit back, like the olympics, and be
> courted by governments wanting to demonstrate their geek cred. So if ICANN
> gets to pick the locations, it's sensible to have a transparent rationale
> for its choices. Not sure I agree with this particular process, but it's a
> useful step.
>
> As ICANN is looking to hold its meetings at convention centres (with
> nearby hotels) rather than within the hotels themselves, the number of
> cities capable of accommodating meetings is still rather high (and indeed
> this was the model used in Brussels and Nairobi). So that isn't a
> significantly limiting factor.
>
> So far, the intent of having the meetings in different cities appeared to
> be five-fold:
>
>    1. Appear to the public to be globally engaged, to counter ICANN's
>    legal status as a California corporation
>    2. Engage the local community in ICANN issues
>    3. Expose ICANN and its usual stakeholders to a global diversity of
>    needs and sensitivities
>    4. Be less expensive to attend (at least to the one-in-five meetings
>    in your region)
>    5. Allow host cities and/or governments to show off their Internet
>    savvy to the world
>
> So let's examine how well these are working:
>
> *Appear to the public to be globally engaged:*  As a public relations
> tactic the current roadshow presents an image of a globally active ICANN.
> Yet the reality is that ICANN meetings are, by and large, the same
> rich-world group of vested interests and lawyers following ICANN around
> wherever it goes. And the results of all these years of travel are ICANN
> policies that still act as if the global south doesn't exist. So maybe the
> issue here is that nobody's being fooled anymore, so perhaps ICANN should
> drop its pretences.
>
>  *Engage the local community:  *I guess I just don't see it. A handful of
> local NGOs and governments attend shows who otherwise wouldn't participate,
> but the reality is that this effect is far more claimed than realized. How
> many ALSs have joined as a direct result of an organization attending a
> local ICANN meeting? Shock exposure of the local community to ICANN
> meetings dominated by experienced, aggressive players and full of technical
> jargon is not what I'd consider an optimal form of outreach. If ICANN would
> budget for preparatory meetings to engage communities in advance, this
> might be worthwhile. But this is not happening. So what we have is an
> expensive charade.
>
> *Expose ICANN participants to diverse needs and sensitivities*: Nice
> intent, no proof that there's anything to this outside of delegates getting
> a taste of local food (and whatever culture they can glean from the Gala).
> And maybe some local comments injected into the Public Forum (which, like
> most other comments at the forum, are for the speakers' benefit and not the
> audience's).
>
> *Be less expensive to attend* Nope. For every person who saves money by
> going to Durban or Cartagena, a hundred more are paying double or triple
> what it would cost to go to a global hub city. In terms of the sheer
> practicality, it might actually be less expensive to have an AFRALO general
> assembly in Paris than in the region (ditto for LACRALO and Miami) – but
> that's the fault of the travel industry, not ICANN.
>
> *Allow hosts to show off their Internet savvy*: I'd say that pool is
> pretty well exhausted. ICANN now struggles just to find hosts willing to
> bear the costs of the Gala. Nobody needs ICANN anymore for publicity;
> indeed, given the noise in WCIT and elsewhere, it seems that ICANN may be
> actively shunned by some of the very places where it *should* be for the
> purposes listed above (Moscow, for instance).
> Anyway... this is just food for thought as we determine a response.
>
>
>