[ALAC] ATRT2 Draft Report - ALAC Perspective

[Alan Greenberg]

I promised some pointers to the recommendations that might be of 
particular interest to the ALAC and At-Large. This is not to imply 
that the others may not be of interest, but the ones I am 
highlighting may directly affect us or touch on issues that have been 
the subject of earlier ALAC/At-large discussions.

3 - Evaluate Board compensation: Although not immediately relevant, 
the At-Large Director is also eligible for compensation and the 
extent to which this improves (or hurts the pool of candidates 
seeking the position may be of interest in the longer term (I say the 
longer term because any results from this recommendation will not be 
immediately available).

4 - SO/AC consultation on issues to be addressed by the Board. This 
recommendation aims to eliminate the perception and perhaps reality 
of the Board acting in isolation without appropriate input.

6 - GAC transparency: Although not directly related to the ALAC, it 
is clear that GAC advice and other input to the Board has the 
potential for substantive impact, and anything which makes their 
input more understandable and transparent is a good thing. Currently, 
the source and motivation of some of their input is cloaked in 
secrecy. The recommendation also makes reference to the possibility 
of Liaisons from other ACs and SOs to the GAC, something that the 
ALAC has long discussed.

7 - Improve the public comment process.

8 - Improve translation services.

9 - Review Ombudsman role. The ALAC, or more particularly the ALAC 
Chair, has at times called upon the Ombudsman, but some of the 
services that have been provided (to our benefit), have not actually 
been sanctioned by the Bylaws governing the Ombudsman.

10 - Improve the PDP and in particular, make participation easier and 
more productive, and ensure that those not funded by their companies 
(such as At-Large participants) are not disadvantaged. It also 
addresses language issues. Lastly, there is note that the 
"disadvantaged" should be better supported in all areas of ICANN and 
not just GNSO PDPs. Travel issues are directly connected to this one. 
The decision on whether to proceed with this wider recommendation may 
hinge on what level of support (or rejection) it receives during the 
comment process.

If the ALAC feels that any of these (or other) recommendations are 
important, a statement of support should be made. You can be sure 
that if anyone else feels that they would be BAD for ICANN, a comment 
will be made. By the same token, if the ALAC feels that any of the 
recommendations are ill-advised, this is the time to go on record saying so.

Alan