[ALAC] Inactive WG Report

Alberto Soto asoto at ibero-americano.org
Mon May 16 05:59:06 UTC 2016


Dear Alan, +1 Moureen and Tijani.

It might be appropriate to apply a methodology for WG.

It should consider that when established or in a short term, the Chair of WG
determine objectives, scope and schedule of work and reports to ALAC at
least.

Responsibility for compliance should be the Chair of the WG. The monitoring
would be through reports to ALAC.

Within ALAC someone responsible for this monitoring.

 

Kind regards

 

Alberto Soto

 

De: alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:alac-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg
Enviado el: domingo, 15 de mayo de 2016 11:48 p.m.
Para: ALAC <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Asunto: [ALAC] Inactive WG Report

 

Before I start, note that I could not see any reason for this thread being
on the ALAC-Internal list and have moved my reply to the public list.

A few comments:

1. As I previously noted, I really cannot get that excited about whether we
temporarily shelve an inactive WG or shut it down. I have a slight
preference for the latter, but there is really no difference. Regardless of
the name of the process, we will preserve the work spaces, history and
mailing lists.

2. For ongoing WGs, I believe that we need a clearly stated mission. I
suspect a "charter" may be overkill (but see my next point). I would not
want to set too high a barrier to starting a WG. And for some WGs, it is not
clear that we want to specify outcomes ahead of time.

3. On membership, we have always been VERY open. For WG/SC with specific
tasks assigned by the ALAC (such as Finance & Budget, Outreach & Engagement
or the CROPP_RT, it makes sense to limit "membership" and voting rights and
have required regional representation and balance. For other WGs, is there a
real need to have all that?

Alan

At 15/05/2016 08:58 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:




It is easy to just close
WGs and just start up new ones when required, but
where does it leave the original intent of the first WG? You also lose a
lot of the history which reviving enables you to continue with -
assuming
you can access this history on the community wiki.
 
Our new At-Large website lists all WGs and links to their
workspaces.  But
some of these workspace pages are embarrassingly out of date, the page
is
filled with a list of WG members who never turn/ed up and monthly report
spaces are empty.
 
I am suggesting a reorganisation of these workspaces and a review of
some
of our current WG practices to include the following:
 
1. In keeping with Tijani's suggestion, the establishment of WGs should
follow a simple At-Large WG Charter with its mission, specific rules,
members and outcomes clearly stated, and with initially prescribed
time-framed outputs - so everyone knows what they are there for and some
indication of who long this commitment is required for. Some WGs already
have Charters, others don't. Outputs can change over time too, depending
on
the type of WG.
 
2. A monthly report on the workspace could simply be a table listing the
meeting date and a brief summary of the decisions made. Meeting notes
can
be linked here  Any interested new participants can therefore view
the WGs
history in relation to its purpose, and also understand what stage of
the
WGs life-cycle they are entering into.
 
3. WGs should consist of Members (1 or 2 from each region - one is
Chair)
who must be active or be replaced. It was raised as an ALAC metric that
ALAC members should be actively reporting to their RALOs about the WGs
they
are in and encouraging participation.
 
4. Other Non-Member Participants in WG meetings should be acknowledged
in
the meeting notes and their ALS or other affiliation recorded (for WG
metrics).
 
5. Once all the outputs related to the original purpose of the WG have
been
achieved, a final report of its achievements should be submitted and the
WG
can then be closed legitimately.
 
6. If another similar WG is to be formed, then the final report of the
former WG's activities could be linked to the new workspace, to give
some
acknowledgement of the work that has already been done in that area.
 
 
Perhaps we need a WG on At-Large WGs and Workspaces, etc :-)
 
Maureen
 
 
On Sun, May 15, 2016 at 12:43 PM, Vanda Scartezini
< <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
vanda at scartezini.org
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> >
wrote:
 
> Liked the approach. Just end the group and when needed create
another
> group – with the same name -, specially because probably persons
will not
> be the same.
> 
> Vanda Scartezini
> Polo Consultores Associados
> Av. Paulista 1159 # 1004
> 01311-200 – Sao Paulo/SP – Brazil
> Phone: + 55 11 3266-6253
> Mobile: + 55 11 98181-1464
> 
> On 5/14/16, 6:50 PM,
" <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
alac-internal-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal>  on
> behalf of Alan Greenberg"
< <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
alac-internal-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
> on behalf of
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> > wrote:
> 
> >I find the discussion about whether a WG should
> >be "archived" so it can be revived or shut down
> >is rather academic. Typically those in the former
> >category have no formal mission or charter, no
> >chair and no active members. So all we are going
> >to revive at some unspecified time in the future
> >is the name. And we have no rule saying we cannot
> >re-use a name. Both paths lead to the same end.
> >
> >Being somewhat pedantic, I will note that in
> >another part of my life, I interact a lot with
> >Archives. Things that are archived are by
> >definition records from the past that are not
> >going to be changed or reactivated. So
> >technically we do want to archive records of
> >closed WGs to preserve the history, but that
> >might not be the best name for a WG that we really think
will live once
> more.
> >
> >Alan
> >
> >At 14/05/2016 01:28 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
> >>I think the important point is that "archived"
means it can be revived
> when
> >>the circumstances are right. Most of our
"on-hold" WGs are in the same
> >>situation except that they already have an identified
chair and active
> >>members who can resume once we get back to some sort of
"normality" (if
> >>there is such a thing in ICANN ?)
> >>
> >>M
> >>On 14/05/2016 3:36 am, "Seun Ojedeji"
<seun.ojedeji at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Yeah I discuss my interest to get involved
sometime ago with Olivier
> >> > (though not necessarily as chair) but could still
stick my head out
> to wear
> >> > the hat if it comes to that. For now what I am
saying is that we could
> >> > leave it packed but not deleted based on post
transition activities
> of CSC
> >> > (don't know how heavy it will be)
> >> >
> >> > Regards
> >> >
> >> > Sent from my LG G4
> >> > Kindly excuse brevity and typos
> >> > On 14 May 2016 10:43, "Maureen Hilyard"
> >> <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Yay Seun!  Does that mean you would be
interested in Chairing the
> Technical
> >> > Issues WG? I am sure that those who have been
interested enough to
> stick
> >> > with the team would love to get their show back on
the road.  You can
> get
> >> > more info from Olivier.
> >> >
> >> > Pity about the joint NCSG-ALAC group not getting
off the ground.
> Perhaps
> >> > with different (NCSG) personnel things may have
progressed normally.
> >> >
> >> > M
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 10:18 PM, Seun Ojedeji
<seun.ojedeji at
> gmail.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Thanks Maureen, I also initially thought that
both groups were
> going to
> >> > > have similar views as well as it concerns the
transition but after
> >> > > participating on the NCSG discussions (during
the early times) it
> became
> >> > > obvious that interest differ significantly.
It's definitely a +1
> from me
> >> > as
> >> > > well. However if the NCSG makes a move in
future, we can be sure to
> >> > > reconsider and a new WG can always be setup
as may be required.
> >> > >
> >> > > That said, I am quite interested in the
"Technical Issues WG" I
> think we
> >> > > may not want to kill it yet, considering that
we may have a CSC
> liaison
> >> > > post-transition, it could then be the home to
discuss those issues
> >> > related
> >> > > to names IANA operations.
> >> > >
> >> > > Regards
> >> > >
> >> > > Sent from my LG G4
> >> > > Kindly excuse brevity and typos
> >> > > On 13 May 2016 2:33 a.m., "Maureen
Hilyard"
> >> <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
> >> > > wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Hi Leon
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Actually that was the only one that
volunteered closure.  The
> >> > explanation
> >> > > > in more detail was...
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The WG which you have referred to below
was born dead. When CWG
> IANA &
> >> > > CCWG
> >> > > > Accountability were started, there were
hopes that the ALAC and
> NCSG
> >> > > would
> >> > > > have similar view on the public
interest. Unfortunately NCSG's
> choice
> >> > of
> >> > > > representatives like Milton Mueller and
Robin Gross, meant that
> any
> >> > > > dialogue was completely impossible from
the outset.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >  I'd suggest we close this one as
it has not only done nothing
> but will
> >> > > > likely never be able to do anything.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Maureen
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, May 12, 2016 at 1:59 PM, León
Felipe Sánchez Ambía <
> >> > > > leonfelipe at sanchez.mx> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Dear Maureen,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Thanks for this very useful
document. I support your
> suggestions. The
> >> > > > only
> >> > > > > one I have doubt about is the joint
At-Large-NCSG WG. Should we
> try
> >> > to
> >> > > > give
> >> > > > > it a last chance before burying
it?
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > Best regards,
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > León
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > El 12/05/2016, a las 2:34
p.m., Maureen Hilyard <
> >> > > > > maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
escribió:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Hi Alan
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > A request was made at our last
ALT meeting to look into 10 WGs
> >> > which
> >> > > > had
> >> > > > > > been inactive for some time.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > In my report, a very brief
statement and a recommendation has
> been
> >> > > made
> >> > > > > for
> >> > > > > > each, but the overall
recommendation is that 6 should be
> reinstated
> >> > > as
> >> > > > > > ACTIVE or ON-HOLD for the
reasons given; 2 are to be closed;
> and 2
> >> > > are
> >> > > > to
> >> > > > > > be archived and revived if
required in the future.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > The 2 WGs recommended for
closure are:
> >> > > > > > (1)  the joint
At-Large-NCSG WG which  never really got
> started and
> >> > > > > > (2) the Study group re: use of
names for countries and
> territories)
> >> > > > > having
> >> > > > > > completed its objective and a
CCWG being subsequently formed
> in
> >> > which
> >> > > > > > At-Large is represented.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > The 2 WGs recommended for
archiving and if required in the
> future
> >> > can
> >> > > > be
> >> > > > > > resurrected to deal with
related matters. Neither have
> identified
> >> > > > Chairs
> >> > > > > or
> >> > > > > > active members, but were
considered to be important enough
> that
> >> > they
> >> > > > are
> >> > > > > > able to be revived if needed.
These are the Technical Issues
> WG and
> >> > > the
> >> > > > > > At-Large new gTLDs WG
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > My report is attached.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > Maureen
> >> > > > > > <INACTIVE-PASSIVE WGs
> >> > > > >
Report.docx>_______________________________________________
> >> > > > > > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > > > > > ALAC-Internal at
atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> > > > > >
> 
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > ALAC Wiki:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
_______________________________________________
> >> > > > > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > > > > ALAC-Internal at
atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> > > > >
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > ALAC Wiki:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
_______________________________________________
> >> > > > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > > > ALAC-Internal at
atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> > > >
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> > > >
> >> > > > ALAC Wiki:
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> > > >
> >> > >
_______________________________________________
> >> > > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > > ALAC-Internal at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> > >
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> > >
> >> > > ALAC Wiki:
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> > >
> >> > > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> > >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > ALAC-Internal at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> >
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> >
> >> > ALAC Wiki:
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> >
> >> > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > ALAC-Internal mailing list
> >> > ALAC-Internal at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> >
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >> >
> >> > ALAC Wiki:
> >> >
> >>
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >> >
> >> > At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> >> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >ALAC-Internal mailing list
> 
> <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
ALAC-Internal at atlarge-lists.icann.org
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
> 
> <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> >
> >ALAC Wiki:
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> >
> >At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC-Internal mailing list
> 
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
ALAC-Internal at atlarge-lists.icann.org
<https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
> 
 <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal> 
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-internal
> 
> ALAC Wiki:
> 
 
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA
C
<https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28
ALAC> 
)
> 
> At-Large Website:
http://atlarge.icann.org
> 


This email has been protected by YAC (Yet Another Cleaner) http://www.yac.mx
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20160516/186ea499/attachment.html>


More information about the ALAC mailing list