<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">Hi Carlton<div><br></div><div>Just a quick note - for people like me, I can only do so many calls at 0200 (I am not another CLO), but do read meeting transcripts, and do participate in discussions on line, so be a bit careful on what is meant by participation.</div><div><br></div><div>That said, continual apologies - and nothing more - should be worth about zero</div><div><br></div><div>Holly<br><div><div>On 9 Aug 2015, at 9:39 am, Carlton Samuels <<a href="mailto:carlton.samuels@gmail.com">carlton.samuels@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">+1. </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">The challenge is adjusting the structural underpinnings of the At-Large engagement in ICANN and the perceptions of performance. And that will be difficult, at best.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">More to the point, we are not seeing the kind of innovative thinking about performance metrics that would make what you and I see as value come to the top.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">Case in point. We had a recent situation in LACRALO where it was seriously proposed that if one sends an apology for non-attendance - <i>note well, purely not attending</i> - an online meeting, that should be counted as participation! </div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">And, some benighted fella would claim offense if one were to reflexively say aloud that the notion as expressed offends even the commonsensical idea of what is stupid.</div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large"><br></div><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:comic sans ms,sans-serif;font-size:large">-Carlton</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature"><br>==============================<br>Carlton A Samuels<br>Mobile: 876-818-1799<br><i><font color="#33CC00">Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround</font></i><br>=============================</div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:37 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:ocl@gih.com" target="_blank">ocl@gih.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Dear Alan,<br>
<br>
agreed on all your other points.<br>
<span class=""><br>
On 08/08/2015 00:58, Alan Greenberg wrote:<br>
><br>
> 3. The latter ones come to meetings, perhaps attend some meetings,<br>
> enjoy the local offerings, and go home and forget about us until the<br>
> next trip. THOSE are the ones that I have a real problem with.<br>
<br>
</span>And unfortunately whenever the time comes for having face to face<br>
meetings, we treat those people the same way as we treat the people who<br>
genuinely want to get involved. It is impossible to build a relationship<br>
with people who do not make the effort to keep involved in between face<br>
to face meetingsMy argument is that we should identify people who have a<br>
genuine interest in helping out and facilitate their involvement in face<br>
to face meetings, more often than at GAs every 5 years.<br>
So far, what I have done is to give excellent references to people<br>
applying for the fellowship program and whom I judge to be of real<br>
potential. But that's not enough since the program is only available for<br>
developing nations.<br>
This is why I would favour the ability for the ALAC to invite people<br>
from their ALSes to an ICANN meeting, based on a skill requirement. For<br>
example, the hot topic is about WHOIS, let's invite people whom we know<br>
to be privacy experts. The hot topic is about ICANN Accountability -<br>
let's invite people who run an ALS that has a need to impeccable<br>
accountability. etc.<br>
<br>
Kind regards,<br>
<br>
Olivier<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
_______________________________________________<br>ALAC mailing list<br><a href="mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org">ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org</a><br>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac<br><br>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org<br>ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)</blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>