[ALAC] Proposal for Creating an At-Large Review WG Implementation Plan

[Nick Ashton-Hart]

Dear ALAC and Community members:

As you know, a number of agenda items from the meeting of the 28th will 
be addressed at a special session of the ALAC (date to be chosen by doodle).

We would like to propose the following for consideration at that time, 
as an outline of how to begin to give effect to the Board's resolution 
to adopt the recommendations of the At-Large Review Working Group's 
Final Report.

1. Staff will create a document showing the recommendations, at a high 
level.
2. Underneath each major recommendation, the staff would propose an 
initial list of those activities or improvements to processes which seem 
relevant.
3. Staff would propose relative priority to each, at a high level ('near 
term' - 3-6 months; 'medium term' - 6-9 months; 'longer term - 9 months 
or longer). We would do under the premise that the community does not 
want to  spend a majority of its time or energy engaged in process 
improvements, and that it is therefore important the work undertaken is 
not to the detriment to the community's other priorities, but rather is 
complementary to them.

3. All of the above would  then be provided for the At-Large community 
to review, for a 30-day period. During that time, the community members 
could propose the addition of new subjects, deletion or modification of 
existing subjects, ask questions and provide any other comments they 
think relevant.

4. During the comment period, special purpose teleconferences would be 
organised for community members to gather and discuss all of the above, 
and provide additional input and ideas.

5. At the end of the comment period, a new version of the document would 
be produced incorporating the views expressed. This could then be 
subjected to a vote of the ALAC; at the same time, the staff could begin 
to look at the resourcing of the various initiatives.

The objective of all this is that we would have, in good time for the 
Seoul meeting, a high-level plan for implementation of the review 
working group proposals which the Board approved. This, in turn, could 
then be the  subject of discussions at the face-to-face meetings in Seoul.

It is worth noting that the Board has frequently directed plans of  this 
type to general ICANN public comment periods, and it may wish to do so 
in this instance - though there is no certainty that it would do so.

The procedure outlined above is not meant to suggest that we staffers 
wish to set the agenda for  the improvements - on the contrary, we 
believe that would be precisely the wrong way to proceed. We believe it 
is essential that At-Large feel the programme of work ultimately 
undertaken is to its benefit and serves its interests. That is only 
possible if At-Large is in the 'driving seat' with respect to the entire 
programme.

We have proposed originating a draft as we know that it is often easier 
to get the 'creative juices flowing' on an issue if there is a 
'strawman' proposal to review, rather  than simply handing a large group 
of people distributed throughout the world a blank sheet of paper.


-- 

-- 

Regards,

 

Nick Ashton-Hart

Director for At-Large

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN)

Tel: +33 (450) 42 81 83

USA Tel: +1 (310) 301-8637

Fax: : +41 (22) 594-85-44

Mobile: (Switzerland): +41 79 595 5468

email: nick.ashton-hart at icann.org

Win IM: ashtonhart at hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart at mac.com / 
Skype: nashtonhart

Online Bio:   https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart