[ALAC] Some thoughts on ALS Criteria & Expectations Taskforce

Holly Raiche h.raiche at internode.on.net
Mon Aug 10 10:46:16 UTC 2015

Hi Evan

I’d add a sixth to your list:

The F2F WG meetings where those of us who have been on weekly WG calls get to actually meet, have conversations, cups of coffee etc. 
On 10 Aug 2015, at 4:23 am, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:


> On 9 August 2015 at 19:15, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com> wrote:
> Evan, what you are saying contradicts ICANN's stated commitment to the multistakeholder bottom-up approach.
> ​You'll have to tell me how I said that, because I can't make the connection between my comment and your response.​
> ​But, just so my own PoV is clear, I now believe that what is generally known as "multistakeholderism", especially ​in the ICANN context, is in the eye of the beholder and variously manipulated to serve political needs. There are multiple tiers of stakeholders; indeed some of the multi-class categorizations are right in the ICANN bylaws. ACs versus SOs, to start with.
> Volunteer contributions are ignored in favour of those in whom a heavy financial investment has been made to make decisions for the Board.
> ​I don't think I said anything to contradict that. In fact the above (to me) is more demonstrable ​fact than opinion.
> Their presence at an ALAC meeting for 20 mins is hardly going to make any real impact on what they already propose to do.
> ​I would be the first to agree that the typical parade of talking heads and Powerpoints at ICANN meetings is ineffective. This is why I ​explicitly put forward the premise, in my original comment, that "maybe some of our most important travel is NOT to ICANN meetings".
> Except for the meetings we have with David Olive and Steve Crocker which I enjoy because I think there is a mutual respect for honesty, I always view those other sessions with the hierarchy as top-down tokenism. What really changes that is of importance to the ALAC?
> ​You're right. Sometimes I think that, with five exceptions, everything ALAC needs to do at ICANN meetings could be done as well virtually as in person:
> The meetings with Steve, agreed fully
> The 50% of the meetings with the Board when they don't wake up grumpy
> Interactions with the GAC -- not common but very important when they happen
> The social interaction (that IMO indeed helps productivity)
> The public forum (when we have something to say; it's unfortunate but true that a three minute speech at the mike gets as much staff attention as a months-long process to create advice)
> Except for the social interaction, none of the things above requires 27 people;
> (15 ALAC + 5 RALO Chairs + 5 RALO Secretariats + 2 SO liaisons = 27)
> I would also like to congratulate Glenn on his mentorship of his new ALS members at the GA.
> ​Agreed, but that's not really relevant to my comments.​
> - Evan
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150810/bc4602eb/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list