[ALAC] At-Large and ICANN72
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
ocl at gih.com
Tue Oct 12 14:49:41 UTC 2021
Dear Maureen,
thank you for your kind follow-up and explanation. I'll relay the point
made that ICANN decided that the meeting was going to be over three
weeks, as well as Gisella's note that the At-Large week details will be
sent out to the other SO AC Lists.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 11/10/2021 19:49, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
> Hi Olivier and all
>
> Well that sounds like that was an interesting meeting, and great to
> see that what At-Large is doing is being seen as impacting to some
> level of importance on other areas of ICANN.
>
> *ICANN decided that the meeting was going to be over three weeks.* The
> ICANN community is now experiencing its sixth virtual meeting, and
> half of the community live outside of the European and the US time
> zones. Not surprisingly, ICANN statistics have shown that the
> attendance by the other half of the world has not been great. For
> At-Large, I wanted to look at how we could use the ICANN meeting time
> more effectively to get more attendance and participation among those
> members who have not or could not attend even our own sessions at
> ICANN meetings. Naturally, we would welcome participants from other
> communities to join into our sessions and hope that they do not feel
> disadvantaged by our making use of what is considered to still be
> within the ICANN meeting timeframe.
>
> The week in between Prep Week and the ICANN meeting, despite whatever
> purpose ICANN originally intended, was created as the At-Large Week
> for the convenience of our community members whom we are encouraging
> to attend _our_ sessions at least. It has given us an opportunity to
> experiment and do something different that considers our community of
> volunteers first, and to look at how it might impact their
> participation and attendance. Because they are real volunteers, many
> cannot sustain the timeframe of a full-on ICANN meeting even over four
> days.
>
> Because of my lone timezone, I myself have found that trying to stay
> awake across a block of nearly 10 hours in the middle of the night to
> attend irregular sessions has been very difficult, and more so when I
> have also had to work during my daylight hours. It has taken me at
> least a couple of weeks to get back to some sort of normality after a
> meeting.
>
> The At-Large week schedule is being held during what is our normal
> At-Large meeting times and at a more manageable load of two sessions a
> day. Our sessions do not conflict with other ICANN community sessions
> as they normally do when we participate in an ICANN meeting. At-Large
> involvement in the ICANN meeting this time is minimal and enables our
> members to attend other community sessions and to learn about what is
> of interest to the rest of the ICANN community. Our social media
> working group will be doing its best to ensure that other ICANNN
> communities are informed of our sessions as well as those of other
> communities that might be of interest to At-Large.
>
> I find it interesting that at a time when ICANN itself is asking the
> wider community how they think future meetings will be held, that some
> ICANNers are persisting that other communities must fit their
> expectations. Fortunately, we have been given an opportunity to
> consider what best meets the needs of our community first. There were
> no objections made when it was first raised at the SOAC meeting nor
> during our own planning sessions. However, if we find at the end of
> the ICANN meeting that it had no real effect then so be it. Back to
> the drawing board.
>
> I hope that helps.
> Regards
> Maureen
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2021 at 4:16 AM Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond
> <ocl at gih.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Maureen,
>
> I am just off a call with UK ICANN Stakeholders, a sort of an
> ICANN Read-Out with selected UK based ICANN participants, and I
> shared the At-Large Activities, both during the ICANN week, but
> also in the so-called "At-Large Week".
> Whilst there were congratulatory remarks all about for the
> At-Large to convene such interesting sessions, two comments, from
> Susan Payne and Chris Disspain questioned the organising of the
> "At-Large Week". Susan, in particular, explained that the ICANN72
> organising committee debated at length how long the ICANN meetign
> should be, whether it should be a short meeting or a longer one
> and the consensus that was reached across SO/AC/SG was to have a
> shorter ICANN week that was 4 days in length.
> I explained that for the At-Large Community, 4 days were
> impractical as it had to conduct its own business whilst offering
> its community the ability to attend plenaries, official meetings
> of the Board, public forum etc. So the At-Large week was primarily
> organised for At-Large participants but open to everyone, as in
> many At-Large meetings. This did not quite satisfy Susan nor
> Chris: both said that the topics and line-ups of these meetings
> were very interesting, yet they were not on the public meeting
> schedule and it would be interesting if they were, so as for many
> more participants to be able to attend them. Chris in particular
> mentioned that if members of the ICANN Board were attending these
> meetings, they should be part of the overall ICANN Schedule. But
> of course, that cannot happen since this is not technically part
> of the ICANN meeting.
>
> So I didn't know what to say. How are the At-Large Week meetings
> going to be advertised? Are the At-Large happy to have anyone
> attend? How do you respond to those who say that the At-Large has
> effectively created, in its policy sessions, more potential
> plenary ICANN sessions outside the ICANN plenary session schedule,
> as it has invited guests from across SOs/ACs/SGs etc?
>
> Kindest regards,
>
> Olivier
>
--
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac/attachments/20211012/be90cd9f/attachment.html>
More information about the ALAC
mailing list