[ALAC] Why aren't more At-Largers involved in PDPs? (was: [ALAC-Announce] ICANN News Alert -- ICANN Provides Update on Review of the Community Priority Evaluation Process)

Evan Leibovitch evan at telly.org
Fri Sep 8 06:43:26 UTC 2017

Hi Alan,

On one hand you have doubts about the suggestions I have already given,
then ask:

how can we get more involvement in the issue so the outcomes have a higher
> chance of meeting what we believe is needed?

​If you didn't like my previous answers you may not like these, since
they're more-specific applications of what I have already said.​
But, since you asked:

   - Create and endorse an overarching statement of "this is what the ALAC
   believes best serves global and users" related to the topic as advice to
   the Board. Even if unattainable we need to at least articulate clearly our
   starting point and raise it as an ethical issue. The Board and community
   may well ignore such advice -- heaven knows this wouldn't be the first time
   -- but articulating a position enables us to internally guide any
   more-detailed interventions. It also enables our communities to see that we
   are actually standing for something important to them.

   - It is not an either/or to create overarching ​advice while we get
   involved in the existing groups. We should participate -- to the extent
   that available ​volunteers are able -- in the relevant processes. In some
   cases this may mean simply monitoring a working group and intervening only
   when this topic arises. This reduces workload, making it an easier and more
   manageable task for our volunteer(s). Be prepared to contribute to specific
   At-Large comments, in a way consistent with the overarching statement but
   reflecting the realities of negotiating a multi-stakeholder consensus. We
   may hate the rules but they're right now all we have to work with.

   - Ask staff to assist in collection of research, statistics and other
   materials by (or in possession of) ICANN that can better inform our
   positions. As a tradeoff, let's see if some traditional staff work
   (budgets. meeting planning) can be assigned to volunteers

   - Get the GAC onboard, possibly to the extent of making this a multi-AC
   initiative. The Applicant Support program envisioned by At-Large wouldn't
   have happened without full-throated support from the GAC; this may be an
   opportunity to once again find common cause. Should the GAC support our
   "overarching statement" it will be hard to ignore and the Board will
   instruct the GNSO to address our joint needs.

   - Having ISOC -- not just the chapters but senior staff and policy
   people -- supportive of us is not required but would be very helpful. If
   onboard ISOC may be able to help with R&D that could help us.

   - Put out a solicitation for help from the community, but guarantee that
   newcomers are supported and informed by both staff and ALAC leadership. I
   would think of it as a policy internship rather than a mentoring program.

   - As asked many times, have a CLOSED policy strategy meeting at Abu
   Dhabi in order to frankly assess our available assets and determine how
   best to deploy them in attainment of our overall policy objectives. In fact
   the outcome of this (and related consultations) may drastically change our
   approaches and tactics, beyond either the status quo or what I have
   suggested above. Who knows? We need to ask.

Even a few of these could go a long way to help.

- Evan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20170908/b0c76e84/attachment.html>

More information about the ALAC mailing list