[ALAC] Some thoughts on ALS Criteria & Expectations Taskforce

Holly Raiche h.raiche at internode.on.net
Sun Aug 9 07:49:29 UTC 2015

Hi Carlton

Just a quick note - for people like me, I can only do so many calls at 0200 (I am not another CLO), but do read meeting transcripts, and do participate in discussions on line, so be a bit careful on what is meant by participation.

That said, continual apologies - and nothing more - should be worth about zero

On 9 Aug 2015, at 9:39 am, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com> wrote:

> +1.  
> The challenge is adjusting the structural underpinnings of the At-Large engagement in ICANN and the perceptions of performance.  And that will be difficult, at best.
> More to the point, we are not seeing the kind of innovative thinking about performance metrics that would make what you and I see as value come to the top.
> Case in point. We had a recent situation in LACRALO where it was seriously proposed that if one sends an apology for non-attendance - note well, purely not attending - an online meeting, that should be counted as participation! 
> And, some benighted fella would claim offense if one were to reflexively say aloud that the notion as expressed offends even the commonsensical idea of what is stupid.
> -Carlton
> ==============================
> Carlton A Samuels
> Mobile: 876-818-1799
> Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround
> =============================
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
> Dear Alan,
> agreed on all your other points.
> On 08/08/2015 00:58, Alan Greenberg wrote:
> >
> > 3. The latter ones come to meetings, perhaps attend some meetings,
> > enjoy the local offerings, and go home and forget about us until the
> > next trip. THOSE are the ones that I have a real problem with.
> And unfortunately whenever the time comes for having face to face
> meetings, we treat those people the same way as we treat the people who
> genuinely want to get involved. It is impossible to build a relationship
> with people who do not make the effort to keep involved in between face
> to face meetingsMy argument is that we should identify people who have a
> genuine interest in helping out and facilitate their involvement in face
> to face meetings, more often than at GAs every 5 years.
> So far, what I have done is to give excellent references to people
> applying for the fellowship program and whom I judge to be of real
> potential. But that's not enough since the program is only available for
> developing nations.
> This is why I would favour the ability for the ALAC to invite people
> from their ALSes to an ICANN meeting, based on a skill requirement. For
> example, the hot topic is about WHOIS, let's invite people whom we know
> to be privacy experts. The hot topic is about ICANN Accountability -
> let's invite people who run an ALS that has a need to impeccable
> accountability. etc.
> Kind regards,
> Olivier
> _______________________________________________
> 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)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20150809/6c1db515/attachment.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list