[At-Large] Say Whut!
bzs at theworld.com
bzs at theworld.com
Sat Dec 15 04:37:47 UTC 2018
+1 Evan.
What one would need, however, is a value proposition even if just good
assurance it would be more than jaw (or finger) exercise.
Perhaps, if I May, binding referendums, they've worked so well elsewhere.
But that sort of thing, humor aside.
On December 14, 2018 at 07:24 evan at telly.org (Evan Leibovitch) wrote:
> A lot of this conversation has devolved into a defence of ALSs, and I am hoping
> that that is not the sole focus on comment (positive or negative) on my larger
> point. The organizations that are ALSs can and should play a great role in
> Internet governance, and can produce some of our best policymakers and
> advocates. It is not a coincidence that so many of them are ISOC chapters, a
> fact that provides another nexus of participation in IG.
>
> However, I am asserting that dependence on the RALO/ALS infrastructure by ICANN
> as the source and destination for ALAC interaction with the world's end users
> is absolutely futile.
>
> Let's do the math.
>
> By ICANN's own count, only one third of the world's countries have at least one
> ALS. But do the numbers even deeper. Assume an average membership of 5,000 for
> each of the 130 ALSs, which based on my observation is REALLY generous. The
> means a current MAXIMUM reach of 650,000 people, assuming that all of them are
> engaged in their ALS's ICANN activity.
>
> ITU estimates the number of Internet users at 3.2 billion, meaning that
> assuming 100% ALS engagement (which, let's face it, we are nowhere near) ALAC
> could be speaking to and hearing from AT MOST 0.02% of the Internet's users.
>
> Not only is that number really small, but that 0.02% is not the mainstream of
> users. ALSs are self-selected as having an interest in ICANN and/or Internet
> governance. These groups already have something of a clue about the issues by
> virtue of their interest. The MASSIVE challenge is to reach people who are
> significantly impacted by the tech and the policy yet neither are nor should be
> involved in IG directly. I am asserting that ALAC's challenge is to get the
> this uninvolved world's informed opinion.
>
> The "informed" part means that we need to get useful information out there, and
> by that I don't mean just being another channel for ICANN propaganda, I mean
> the information WE determine that the public needs to know even if that
> knowledge is ignored, hidden by or embarrassing to ICANN (and there's lots of
> that). ICANN has a broad communications and PR network and that's a good place
> to start.
>
> The "opinion" part means going WELL beyond canvassing ALSs, by that I mean
> occasional big scale Nielson/Ipsos type global surveys of the public mood,
> within the general public that day to day doesn't (and shouldn't need to) give
> a damn about ICANN or the DNS. One can have useful and necessary opinions about
> what's wrong with the local highway system without being a road planner,
> traffic police or auto mechanic.
>
> Looking at this as a RALO/ALS project is thinking WAY too small for ALAC to be
> effective in truly representing the public interest to ICANN. We need to reach
> out to a global audience of Internet users who will never even think of owning
> a domain yet is impacted every day by the decisions made at ICANN meetings.
> Abuse, confusion, speculation, the difference between gTLDs and ccTLDs, how to
> complain, user's rights, etc. There is plenty of information that ALAC may
> determine is useful to the public good that ICANN -- with its emphasis on the
> domain-name money path -- may not deem important. Then ALAC can determine the
> questions for the surveys, even if honest answers will be embarrassing. In the
> interest of transparency this is a huge missing piece of ICANN's pretence of
> multi-stakeholderism, and this feedback gives ALAC huge insight regarding what
> really matters to the public and where ALAC's focus should lie.
>
> Does the PUBLIC feel that a new round gTLDs are in its interest? Would it help
> or hurt their use of the Internet? Wouldn't that actually be really useful to
> know? Wouldn't this input give ALAC the gravitas needed when we wants to
> intervene in ICANN in a way that counters the industry inertia? Even the GAC
> doesn't have that.
>
> It's not that ALSs (and even RALOs) don't serve a useful purpose. They don't
> serve THIS purpose as they are too inside the Internet Governance bubble. We
> haven't done nearly enough to reach the opinions of the rest of the world, and
> "outreach" efforts attract at best a slightly more-diverse self-selected elite
> to the table. That's nowhere near enough and we need to stop thinking within
> our little IG bubble.
>
> ALAC desperately needs to escape that bubble for it to be relevant to ICANN,
> IMO.
>
> Cheers,
>
> - Evan
>
>
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2018 at 12:47, Marita Moll <mmoll at ca.inter.net> wrote:
>
>
> I would certainly echo Suzannah's point. Here in Ottawa we are also trying
> to build our community on the ground. It is happening but slowly -- one
> person/group at a time. One just has to keep at it. But the ability to
> broaden our reach with technology is crucial. We don't have the funds to do
> a traveling road show. Not everyone is an ISOC chapter -- so ICANN needs to
> make tools like Livestream available to all groups and individuals in At
> Large who are doing outreach.
>
> Marita
>
> On 12/13/2018 12:27 PM, Susannah Gray wrote:
>
>
>
> On 13/12/2018 00:51, Joly MacFie wrote:
>
> > ALSes as a conduit to their members
>
> Slowly but surely, at least here in NYC, the Readout program
> appears fruitful in this aspect.
>
> - And in San Francisco. As an ALS (San Francisco Bay Area ISOC Chapter)
> we keep our members informed through the Readouts and through updates
> about key ICANN issues on our website/in the Chapter newsletters.
>
> However getting our members to actually participate is a tough call,
> mainly because it's quite hard to 'sell' At-Large and even harder for
> those with little background knowledge of ICANN to get up to speed
> quickly enough to be able to participate effectively.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Susannah
>
> —
> Susannah Gray
> President
> San Francisco Bay Area Internet Society Chapter
> www.sfbayisoc.org
>
>
>
>
> j
>
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
>
> --
> Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
> @evanleibovitch or @el56
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
--
-Barry Shein
Software Tool & Die | bzs at TheWorld.com | http://www.TheWorld.com
Purveyors to the Trade | Voice: +1 617-STD-WRLD | 800-THE-WRLD
The World: Since 1989 | A Public Information Utility | *oo*
More information about the At-Large
mailing list