[EURO-Discuss] Background for tonight's Euralo call

Thu Sep 24 05:39:03 CDT 2009

Hi Cheryl,

thanks for all the further and detailed information on the matter. And 
SORRY for mixing-up/confusing/attributing a quoted statement what 
was not said by you but quoted from Bill (what is always a kind of 
awkward confession for journalists ;-).

For the second part of your message, I was aware that ALAC has had 
a Liaison to the NCUC for several years already, and our idea and 
suggestion from yesterday's call simply was that a continuation 
could be useful - particularly under the given and rather difficult 
circumstances.

Thanks for taking EURALO's proposal under further consideration at 
ALAC.

Best,
Wolf

Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote Thu, 24 Sep 2009 11:36:
>Wolf thanks for the update on the EURALO proposal from it's meeting
>regarding this Agenda item and I assume it will be brought forward for the
>ALAC to consider... But just to be very clear *if* you are attributing
>the sentence below "..."this is going to go anywhere but downhill from
>here" ..." to me that is *not correct*  that is a Statement from Bill which
>I quoted in my earlier message and indeed I would not and will not make that
>sort of predictive or value laden statement on such a volatile topic
>especially as ALAC Chair...
> ALAC has for several years had a Liaison from the ALAC to the NCUC (this
>was of course a natural fit as NCUC was in the pre-restructured GNSO time,
>the clear place and mechanism for individual internet user and non
>commercial registrant input into GNSO PDP and other processes); all ALAC
>meetings are open but we (ALAC and individuals in it) have welcomed the
>proposal from NCUC in recent times to formalize a NCUC Liaison to our AC
>(adding to several other sent from other parts of ICANN) this and
>our reciprocal arrangements decision has been covered by other messages
>including from Alan Greenberg  and myself earlier so I won't repeat here.
> However in those in those interchanges (or referenced to them)
>I believe you will see from ALAC nothing but an intention to work with all
>parts of ICANN *including existing and future GNSO constituencies* that
>affect and effect our role as outlined in the ALAC Review final Report "10.
>ALAC as the representative body for At Large is the primary organisational
>home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN
>processes, although ICANN’s multi stakeholder model provides opportunity for
>individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN
>process." (
>http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf
>p6)
>as if for no other reason  to do otherwise would be maladaptive and
>counterproductive.
>
>I will be making these statement again to the ALAC when we consider whatever
>proposal or suggestions EURALO has resolved today at its meeting, but I have
>taken the time to cover them here as well as it obviously is important that
>we separate hearsay and assumption from intention and desired outcome (from
>ALAC's point if view) at all stages of these discussions.
>
>CLO
>
>2009/9/24 Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net>
>
>> Hi Cheryl and all,
>>
>> thanks for your background infos on tonight's EURALO call what, I think,
>> is helpful to correct some misinterpretations. Let me take your last
>> sentence or questioning assumption that "this is going to go anywhere
>> but downhill from here" and add the conclusion of our call tonight:
>>
>> We are aware that the recent development is more than delicate and the
>> situation is difficult to be understood by many observers (at least at
>> EURALO) who were not closely involved. What we felt is the need to
>> overcome this confrontation leading to nowhere but a deadlock and
>> to try to de-escalate the given situation. At our call tonight we were
>> seeking for options how the relations between ALAC and NCUC could
>> be calmed and improved again, and the nomination of Bill as a
>> Liaison person between both could offer such an opportunity. As you
>> confirmed in your previous response already, Bill offers with his
>> "involvement with EURALO (and NCUC - GNSO) a perfect fit for
>> the Job". If Bill - with support from EURALO - could assume a
>> mediation role in this matter, we will try our best. As we know,
>> the deadline for organising "official" meetings in Seoul has passed
>> already but there should still be opportunities for "informal" ones.
>>
>> Let's try to discuss, define and find ways out and solutions together.
>> Thanks and best regards,
>> Wolf
>>
>>
>> Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:55:
>> >Hi Bill, I'd like you, EURALO and the ALAC to be very aware of a single
>> >point of concern to me in the Blog reply /thread you made in the link
>> >provided below... specifically the following...  PLease note that Robyn as
>> >Chair of NCUC wrote to me in email appointing you as the NCUC liaison
>> (i.e.
>> >advising me of you offer) I replied to her message with copy to staff,
>> copy
>> >to ExCom list (PUBLIC)  within minutes of the receipt of this advice and
>> >announced at the following ExCom and then full ALAC Meeting(s) that a
>> >Liaison from NCUC was most welcome and that you in my opinion with your
>> >involvement with EURALO a perfect fit for the Job, and expected in fact
>> that
>> >you would be well aware of this reply as well as would have attended (if
>> >available) or reviewed our meetings since then (you are already on the
>> >relevant lists get notices links to agenda's etc.,) where the ALAC has
>> >discussed that we will need to appoint a Liaison to the NCSG (with the
>> >existing NCUC being a constituent part of that under the current model
>> were
>> >working with) or review later complaints to us from both our previous NCUC
>> >Liaisons did not motivate us to appoint a replacement to Beau for a month
>> or
>> >so before this change would need to occur any way in our view...  Also
>>  the
>> >ALAC discussed that as we will attend the User House meeting and (with the
>> >exception of the single purpose IRT issue  and our Joint Response / work
>> >activity that enveloped our time (and was conducted in the scheduled
>> meeting
>> >time for NCUC and ALAC in Sydney)  meetings since Mexico  ( well Cairo
>> >actually) have been a duplication of effort and topic and that as we had a
>> >very full set of demands in our Seoul agenda, and as ALAC and RALO leaders
>> >had complained about the workload and requested more time to address
>> policy
>> >development matters;  unless Robyn proposed a topic that required a
>> specific
>> >F2F between the NCUC as a GNSO constituency and our AC then we would only
>> >schedule the User House meeting and use the time for other priority
>> >meetings...  In my reply to Robyn et.al and welcoming you as an NCUC
>> Liaison
>> >to the ALAC I also covered off (in shorter form) all of that as well...
>> Why
>> >you have not been made aware of all this immediate and welcoming response
>> to
>> >your offer from the ALAC however I can not say.
>> >"For my part, I offered almost a month ago to serve as a liaison but never
>> >got a reply from ALAC, and am now told that they've decided they don't
>> need
>> >to liaise with NCUC. And to my knowledge there's no NCUC-ALAC meeting
>> >planned for Seoul. Hard to see how this is going to go anywhere but
>> downhill
>> >from here, but whatever, I guess. "
>> >
>> >CLO
>> >
>> >2009/9/23 William Drake <william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch>
>> >
>> >> Hello,
>> >>
>> >> I see on the agenda item 3, "ALAC response to recent activities of the
>> >> NCUC."
>> >>
>> >> Given the general lack of NCUC-ALAC dialogue and information sharing,
>> I'm
>> >> guessing that not everybody will be equally aware of the background.  To
>> >> that end, the following links might be worth perusing prior to the
>> >> discussion.
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/9/22/4329523.html
>> >>
>> >> http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ncuc-to-beckstrom-18aug09-en.pdf
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >>
>> >> Bill
>> >>
>> >> PS: I will probably have to leave the call after an hour
>> >>
>> >> ***********************************************************
>> >> William J. Drake
>> >> Senior Associate
>> >> Centre for International Governance
>> >> Graduate Institute of International and
>> >>  Development Studies
>> >> Geneva, Switzerland
>> >> william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch
>> >> www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html
>> >> ***********************************************************
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> >> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>
>> >>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >>
>> >> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Cheryl Langdon-Orr
>> >(CLO)
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> >EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> >
>> >Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>> >
>>
>> comunica-ch
>> phone +41 79 204 83 87
>> Skype: Wolf-Ludwig
>> www.comunica-ch.net
>>
>> Digitale Allmend
>> http://blog.allmend.ch -
>>
>> EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation
>> http://euralo.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>
>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Cheryl Langdon-Orr
>(CLO)
>_______________________________________________
>EURO-Discuss mailing list
>EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>

comunica-ch
phone +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig
www.comunica-ch.net

Digitale Allmend
http://blog.allmend.ch -

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation
http://euralo.org