[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Got an Aspirin?

Wed Apr 11 15:33:42 EDT 2007

Well Evan
I can speak to my region - 
The way it's working in LAC is that the reps keep up on all the issues that
are happening, about to happen, etc. They send the info off to the ALSes and
other interested ppl who may not yet be ALSes, who consult with their
membership, and send back the info to the regional reps who take the
opinions, the issues, the concerns back to the RALO and the ALAC, which then
include in advice to the Board or whoever.  I personally  sent a lot of
feedback from the Caribbean on .xxx before the Board discussion on it (it
was early in the Lisbon meeting, not the public meeting on the Friday) -
there wasn't a consensus, so several different positions with supporting
arguments were forwarded. Some of them seemed to have been taken on board
given the transcripts of the Board meeting.
Jacob took up the feedback on the President's Strategy Committee - we got a
lot of discussion on that as well.
We are currently discussing Registerfly and registrar issues, the IGF and
ICANN relationship, gTLDs and the External Review ToR and ALAC structure for
participation. Several members have expressed interest in participating in
the WhoIS WG.
So policy discussion is going on in some regions... it's not just about
structure. Actually this discussion on structure and what was and so on has
never raised its head in the LAC. There was a lot of discussion about
structure in the formation stages, for about 2 months until the RALO was
formed. Since then, hardly any. 
Jacqueline

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan Leibovitch [mailto:evan at telly.org] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2007 2:33 PM
Cc: alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org; na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: [NA-Discuss] Got an Aspirin?

> The newcomers to the process are seemingly unaware of the rights that have
been taken away from our community and are willing to go along with anything
that has been put together by ICANN Staff and ICANN insiders.  It's not
their fault; they simply don't know the history, and being good-spirited
they want to help out in any way that they can.
>   
As one of the newcomers, I can say one thing for certain; it's all so
very headache-inducing.

On one hand: I'm tired of repeated commentaries on the evil ICANN staff
conspiracy to disenfranchise everyone outside of three people named George.

On the other hand: ICANN itself, through a combination of action and
inaction, has given plenty of credibilty to the accusations. And the end
result is a lot of zero.

IMO this isn't about being good spirited, it's about being patient in
the hope that sooner or later there'll actually be a policy to be
debated. The vast majority of the discussion on these lists so far has
been about meetings to determine _structure_. Even these meetings don't
appear to have on their plate anything actually policy-related.

When Jacob 'recruited'  our group last year, attendees at the meeting
were asked about issues that were important. Things such as domain
kiting and the triple-x TLD were at the top of the list. And yet...
while the rejection of XXX has been all over the news, the issue never
came up on these lists. I'd told my group's constitutents last year that
we were part of the advisory process, yet I can't even say that we were
informed of the decision before the media was, on an issue of widespread
public interest.

MEANWHILE... we haven't made the EXISTING structure work -- yet people
are talking about creating additional, non-geographic RALOs? Does anyone
else here understand how absolutely insane this appears to those without
the historical baggage?

> Part of our job is to educate them about their second-class status within
ICANN, about their lack of voting rights, about their lack of control over a
> budget, about their lack of representation, about the degree to which
their input has been ignored over and over again.
>   
If that's the case, what the heck are you doing here? What am I doing
here? Don't we have better things to do than bang heads into brick
walls? If I want to be told what I don't have, I only need to ask my wife.

I have two pleas to the folks involved in this  process:

ICANN staff: Live up to the promises Jacob made to us last year, that we
would be genuinely engaged and consulted on ICANN issues. Frankly I
couldn't care less about the structure -- geographic, linguistic, or
based on tarot cards -- but come up with something that prioritizes
efficient knowledge transfer. The best way to address the complaints is
with utter clarity and openness; let people know exactly what this
process offers and what it doesn't. All the structure, recognition, and
airline pretzels are pointless if the POV of ALSs is not meaningfully
expressed -- and addressed -- on ALL relevant issues. If this isn't
possible or desired then please stop wasting my time. And don't assume
silence means consent, sometimes it just means the situation is too
confused for an informed response.

Angry old-timers: If you're indeed correct about ICANN being opaque and
impervious to comment, stop encouraging that behaviour by spending so
much time on complaining and wheel-spinning -- because in the meantime
real policy discussion CAN'T take place, and the targets of your ire
aren't listening. Clarity in the objections is also sorely lacking --
concentrate on the gaps between what exists and what was formally
committed. Help us know factually what ICANN won't tell us directly
while working within the procss that exists, and let us make our own
minds up rather than being indignant on our behalf. If the current
process is pointless, let's change it with concrete alternatives whose
development doesn't get mixed in with ICANN policy debate. Otherwise,
our mandate is better served by getting out and going public.

Obviously there are many with deep investments -- of time, effort and
emotions -- in this process. I certainly don't mean to insult anyone
individually, but I make no apologies for my exhaustion from a mix of
bureaucratic bafflegab and petty scoldings.

- Evan

_______________________________________________
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica
nn.org
---
Draft MoU with ICANN:
http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU

Draft Operating Principles:
http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 4/9/2007
10:59 PM

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.0.0/754 - Release Date: 4/9/2007
10:59 PM