[At-Large] [ALAC] Idea for an alternative to the EMM proposed in the At-Large Review

Vanda Scartezini vanda at scartezini.org
Mon Feb 13 17:44:33 UTC 2017


I am concerning about the future with, for me not so clear, real role of RALOs under this  proposal.
I have real concerning about rapporteur reporting to ALAC directly and also about , in my view,  individuals possibly totally disconnected from the Ralo focus on policy matters.
Another point not good for me is allow voting for Ralo positions with just 3 months participating... Ralos will become more and more irrelevant and I do not see this as an improvement for the organization.
From my view, anyone reporting in any policy working group they like to be participant and send directly to ALAC, looks like quite difficult to organize, there is no sharing of information to region neither feedback from and in the end will lose the  sense of what is important for that specific  region….regarding to policy.
I like the idea of free individual’s participation but with a stronger connection with the Ralos if they want to become rapporteurs, candidates or voting members of any Ralo.
 I am also in favor to take rapporteurs to ICANN meetings, but this must be on issues and themes aligned with regional interest and after the report is done and debated with regional community.
From my view Ralo shall be the one sending the report of any policy to ALAC, with the name of the rapporteur registered of course.
Good ideas in the report that need some discussion to see how they can be implemented.

Vanda Scartezini
Polo Consultores Associados
Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004
01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil
Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253
Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464
Sorry for any typos.
HAPPY 2017!




From: <at-large-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com>
Date: Monday, February 13, 2017 at 2:09 PM
To: Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>
Cc: 'ALAC List' <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, 'At-Large Worldwide' <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [At-Large] [ALAC] Idea for an alternative to the EMM proposed in the At-Large Review

In NARALO there are only two countries - Canada and USA (Puerto Rico is a colony of USA and considered under the USA umbrella).

-ed

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:06 PM Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>> wrote:
I see what you mean Eduardo.

For example, one chapter per country would limit the number of voting chapters at election time for some regions... . How many countries in NARALO? I think there are over 70 in APRALO.

Will regions have to be changed to allow for more equitable distribution of country chapters? I am sure that Cheryl would love to start that discussion over again... NOT!



On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com<mailto:eduardodiazrivera at gmail.com>> wrote:
I lik ethe idea but need more thinking in its implementation.

For one, by-laws (or something similar) are needed, specially when it come to vote for the regional representatives. We need to think if organization can become members of these chapters an so on. There could  be one chapter per country with one vote per country in the region. Still you need to manage all the chapters in the region. Just thinking out loud.

-ed

On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:52 AM Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard at gmail.com<mailto:maureen.hilyard at gmail.com>> wrote:
I like your idea of ICANN chapters within a country or perhaps a subregion of a large country.

As an ex-Pres of our Rotary Chapter, I find the Rotary concept interesting, but it does set a model that would encourage a wider opportunity for outreach as well as education and training, and policy input at a country level.. and all organised by the members.  Rotary is also self-funding but with the opportunity to get funding from the parent body for special projects.

But it would also mobilise large groups of individual members who at least have a lot of things in common already as a starting point - language and culture,socio-politics, shared internet environment, etc

Sounds a little like the Internet Society of China model with everyone in one country under one umbrella.



On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee at gmail.com<mailto:devtee at gmail.com>> wrote:
Here's an idea for an alternative proposal for At-Large to the EMM model proposed in the At-Large Review

My thoughts - The proposed EMM has flaws. Some immediate ones :

- it destroys the community and with that, the consensus building of community with replacement
of individuals with even less ties to the public community. Such individuals will promote and collude with other individuals to keep themselves in the loop. Also, with many of the policy discussions in GNSO being English, this permanently eliminates persons from developing/emerging economies from non-English from ever participating.
- given that any individual could already participate in GNSO, we would be no different from such random individuals
- it removes the mandate on oversight and accountability on ICANN activities from end user interests
- a thousand individuals in one large country will override 10 individuals from a small country  so there will be less diversity in the EMM model only from those countries with large number of  individuals.
- Nomcom appointees to ALAC new to ICANN will serve as Liasions to other groups is not sensible

There are many more problems but I want to focus on a IMO a better At-Large model than the EMM one:
- ICANN establishes At-Large Chapters in each country similiar in concept to Rotary or ISOC chapters.
- each chapter is open to anyone interested in ICANN from the interests of end users.
- ICANN can set guidelines for each chapter - some examples: must do certain level of outreach, have term limits, have a public F2F awareness meeting to recruit new persons. ICANN would need to provide some funding to make this happen but this would be small and the chapters can account to ICANN for expenses.
- ICANN can provide the tools (mailing lists, conference tools) to facilitate online discussions.
- Because there is a consistent brand - At-Large Chapter in the country, marketing/promoting is
greatly simplified and easier to explain.
- Given that such chapters are virtual, it makes chapters easy to establish with only a few individuals from a country without the challenges of having formal organisations with bylaws and pay taxes.

So an At-Large chapter ends up being a virtual ALS in each country in the ALAC/RALO/ALS model.
The RALOs will consist of the chapters from each country in the region with each chapter electing two persons to coordinate the RALO work. The RALO will be better positioned to better fulfil its MOUs with ICANN and the RALO and ALAC would not have to bother with analysing whether an organisation meets the criteria of an ALS.
The At-Large chapters will be better able to network with At-Large chapters in other countries and build consensus on policy issues and help promote and grow the At-Large Community.


---
Dev Anand

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)

_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org<mailto:ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20170213/136f9d75/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the At-Large mailing list