<html>
<body>
At 08/08/2015 06:36 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On 8 August 2015 at 09:37,
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
<<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com">ocl@gih.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<dl>
<dd>> 3. The latter ones come to meetings, perhaps attend some
meetings,<br>
<dd>> enjoy the local offerings, and go home and forget about us until
the<br>
<dd>> next trip. THOSE are the ones that I have a real problem
with.<br><br>
<dd>And unfortunately whenever the time comes for having face to
face<br>
<dd>meetings, we treat those people the same way as we treat the people
who<br>
<dd>genuinely want to get involved.<br><br>
</dl> <br>
So long as At-Large leadership is selected bottom-up by a reasonably
democratic process, it will not always include the "hardest
workers". Politics of various sorts can happen in any region, and it
is not a stretch to say that "number of hours spent on ICANN in the
past" can often be rended insignificant in an election campaign
next to social skills, global geopolitics or other factors.<br><br>
Somebody may be elected based on nothing more than a promise to vote a
certain way on ALAC statements or to advance a very specific agenda on a
narrow range of issues. How do you confront that without threatening the
democratic process?<br><br>
The easy answer is to ask ICANN for more travel spots as Olivier
suggests, so that (as one possible example) working group chairs (which
are usually in their posts by merit rather than politics because of the
workload). Well, that's an easy answer for us -- to the rest of ICANN's
constituencies, most of which already take At-Large to be a charity case,
this will be a tough sell.</blockquote><br>
Although ALAC Members and RALO Leaders may well fall into all categories,
those tahat fall into category 3 on a regular basis should be dealt with
directly, and the others we have little choice but to accept. At least
for their first term. Of deeper concern and the ones I focused on when
answering were those for whom we support as ALS representatives.<br><br>
<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">(Then again, ICANN could if it
chooses help At-Large look for outside participation sponsorship -- yet
it is unwilling, or unable, to do so.)<br><br>
Anyway... back when I was more deeply involved in At-Large, I resisted
and even belittled the various attempts to push, prod, measure and
silo us. Most of these efforts deserve continuing ridicule, for they
remain largely navel-gazing exercises which are more effective at
distraction and time-burning than anything else.<br><br>
IMO, there are three overarching needs of At-Large:
<ul>
<li>How do we make ICANN and its dilemmas more accessible to the global
public?
<li>How can we best determine what is important to that public?
<li>How can we best advance those priorities within ICANN without being
marginalized? </blockquote>
</ul><br>
I agree. But for better or worse, we either need to make the ALS/RALO
structure work, or reduce its visibility and cost. As it is, it is both
expensive (not necessarily in money, but in time and focus) and opens us
up to strong (and at times valid) criticism <br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Everything we do must serve
one of those needs. This means frankly answering:<br><br>
Who needs to do what at F2F meetings?<br>
(Maybe some of our most important travel is NOT to ICANN
meetings?)<br><br>
How are we engaging with the public outside ICANN?<br>
(If CROPP is as good as it gets let's not even bother)<br><br>
What staff support do we need in research and communications?<br>
(Can we get stats and opinion polls to back our policy
actions?)<br><br>
How do we mobilize pubic opinion?<br>
(First, we get the public to care)<br><br>
Wringing our collective hands over how to deal with laggards and tourists
-- who happen to be popular enough to get elected -- pre-occupied ALAC
before I got involved, and it continues to suck energy out of addressing
the real reason the At-Large community even exists.<br><br>
Meanwhile, the other parts of ICANN that prefer At-Large weak and
ineffectual, delight in our tail-chasing.<br>
<br>
- Evan<br>
</blockquote></body>
</html>