[ALAC] The Role of the At-Large Community - Discussion with the Board

[Alan Greenberg]

One of the topics suggested (by Rinalia) for discussion with the 
Board in CPH is the challenges of engaging with end-users.

I would like to start the discussion by presenting the results of 
Table 3 in the At-Large Review report describing a survey question on 
the role of the A-L Community.

The question read: In your opinion which of the following statements 
most accurately describes the role played by the At-Large Community 
within ICANN?

There were five answers shown here with the % of Board/SO/AC 
respondents for each option.

1. The At-Large Community is made up of ALSes and individual RALO 
members that mainly act in their own interests. (58%)
	
2. The At-Large Community is made up of At-Large Structures (ALSes) 
and individual RALO members that engage in ICANN policy development 
processes on behalf of Internet end users worldwide. (13%)
	
3. At-Large is the body within ICANN that allows all Internet 
end-users to engage in ICANN policy development processes in an equal 
and non-discriminatory fashion. (6%)
	
4. The At-Large Community is made up of At-Large Structures (ALSes) 
and individual RALO members that effectively engage with the global 
community of Internet end-users in a bottom-up, consensus- driven 
fashion. (13%)
	
5. The elected members of the ALAC have a mandate to speak in the 
interests and on behalf of end users in ICANN policy development 
processes. (10%)

My analysis:

1. is largely correct. ALSes are independent entities that generally 
exist outside of the ICANN context. They of course act in their own 
interests (which may well coincide with the interests of other 
including the interests of 3.5 billion users. However, by 
consolidating these regionally diverse inputs, the RALOs and the ALAC 
can reasonably claim to represent the needs and interests of users world-wide.

2. is also correct. We certainly do need to get MORE people involved, 
but if the component parts listed in 2 are not us, who are we?

3. is impossible. How can ANYTHING claim to engage all 3.5 billion 
users, or even provide the mechanisms to allow such participation? Do 
6% of respondents really think we do??

4. is either impossible if it implies that ALSes and individual 
members engage with the ENTIRE global community, or is a reasonable 
target if we mean that each part engages in some subset of their 
local community, or is based on experience with such a community.

5. is false. No one of the 10 RALO-selected (presumably that is what 
they meant by "elected") Member has a mandate to speak on behalf of 
all users or the users of their region. But together, along with the 
NomCom-appointed Members have a mandate to formulate statements which 
they believe will serve the global user community well.

What do people think of this analysis?

Alan