[EURO-Discuss] R: R: Draft Board Report (2012-13) for Lisbon GA

Wolf Ludwig wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net
Wed May 22 19:57:59 UTC 2013


Thanks Roberto for providing such a report! But as noted before (my reply to Oksana) the ICANN regional model with obvious inconsistencies (see Armenia etc.) and ALAC's representation rules are two different issues and shouldn't be confused.

Best, Wolf


Roberto Gaetano wrote Wed, 22 May 2013 08:55:
>In the next couple of days I will circulate a short report of the meeting I
>had at ISOC Armenia, during which the issue of ICANN regions has been
>debated.
>I agree with Oksana, there are cases in which we have to change the rules,
>because there are good reasons for doing so.
>Re: the representative for multiple ALSes, I am just saying that I do not
>see such compelling reason. But if there is one (like the case for Armenia
>in EU rather than AP), I will change my mind.
>Cheers,
>R.
>
>
>> -----Messaggio originale-----
>> Da: euro-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss-
>> bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] Per conto di EMP
>> Inviato: mercoledì 22 maggio 2013 08:35
>> A: Discussion for At-Large Europe
>> Cc: At-Large Staff
>> Oggetto: Re: [EURO-Discuss] R: Draft Board Report (2012-13) for Lisbon GA
>> 
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> We will have today in our governmental agency round table on Cyrillic
>> domain for Ukraine, so I was going to intervene into this discussion
>later, but
>> Roberto's remark forced me to change my mind)
>> 
>> First of all, I have to say, that we are discussing now not "Board"
>report, but
>> only "Chair" report - I saw it for the first time few minutes before
>> teleconference call. This is extremely serious problem for me, and i will
>> return to this issue later.
>> 
>> But regarding Roberto's comment, I would like to clear the problem just
>now.
>> 
>> I agree with Wolf and Olivier that it will be very difficult to change the
>bylaws
>> on this point.
>> But besides the difficulty and complexity, what would be the *real* need
>for
>> such change?
>> Honestly, I believe that our aim should be to include more and more
>people,
>> and electing the same representative as a leader for multiple ALSes,
>whether
>> in the same or different region, is going in the opposite direction. We
>should
>> favour more individuals to get leadership responsibilities in ALAC, not
>have
>> the same set of people speaking in name of more ALSes.
>> So, I am personally against this proposal, not for the complexity of the
>> change, but because it will move us in the wrong direction.
>> 
>> <OP> Roberto, you are now in Armenia, and you yourself raised the issue
>> regarding Armenia allocation to ICANN region. Armenia IS in Europe, and
>HAS
>> TO BE in EURALO. I am absolutely sure, that all Armenian representatives
>are
>> or will be extremely successful and highly appreciated in APRALO. But it
>is
>> EURALO's gap that WE can not use their potential in full capacity.
>> Yes, Siranush and Narine are nearly the most regular participants of our
>> teleconference calls (unlike majority of other members of EURALO), but it
>is
>> not enough.
>> 
>> So, when I am talking about changes in the rules, I mean such exceptional
>> cases. I am really ready to raise this issue within ALAC, at least to ask,
>if this
>> problem with Armenia is unique, or there are some other similar cases. If
>> there are, I will insist on broad discussion of this issue.
>> 
>> I am fully understand, how Wolf is frustrated with my obstinacy with this
>> issue, but I would like to remember, that two years ago, when I tried to
>raise
>> visa issues for the first time, I was indisputably said (again by Wolf),
>that
>> ICANN is absolutely wrong place to discuss this issue. Now visa issues are
>on
>> ICANN agenda. (Of course, I understand, that it's not my achievement, but
>> rather Canada merit)))). But maybe, this time I will also receive some
>> otherworldly help?)))
>> 
>> I am not sure that I will be on-line until the late evening, but I will
>follow this
>> discussion.
>> 
>> Best regards,
>> Oksana
>> 
>> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 8:55 PM, Roberto Gaetano <
>> roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com> wrote:
>> > Just on 1 point, my comment below:
>> >
>> >> >In response to Oksana's suggestion that ALS *representatives* should
>> >> >be able to be an ALS *representative* in another region, this is
>> >> >forbidden in the ALAC bylaws for a reason to make sure there might
>> >> >not be a possibility of manipulation/capture. It is 99.9% sure that
>> >> >this cannot change because any change to this rule would need
>> >> >approval from the ALAC and approval from the Board and I don't see
>this
>> happening ever.
>> >> >
>> >> >Of course, there is no rule against being a simple member of several
>> >> >ALSes. I am a member of 3 ALSes in 3 different regions; some are
>> >> >members of more than 3, in different or in the same region, it doesn't
>> matter.
>> >>
>> >> (WL) I explained this point in length and details already by making
>> >> clear
>> > that
>> >> we can be *simple members* of different ALSes inside and outside a
>> >> region BUT we can NOT be *representatives* of more than one ALS
>> >> (inside or outside a region), as you confirmed Olivier. And I
>> >> repeatedly noted that
>> > we
>> >> (at RALO level) cannot change this rule. IF anybody is still unhappy
>> >> with
>> > this
>> >> binding ALAC rule, the person can try to convince ALAC about a
>> >> respective change of their Bylaws! This was my very last comment on
>this
>> point.
>> >
>> > I agree with Wolf and Olivier that it will be very difficult to change
>> > the bylaws on this point.
>> > But besides the difficulty and complexity, what would be the *real*
>> > need
>> for
>> > such change?
>> > Honestly, I believe that our aim should be to include more and more
>> people,
>> > and electing the same representative as a leader for multiple ALSes,
>> whether
>> > in the same or different region, is going in the opposite direction.
>> > We should favour more individuals to get leadership responsibilities
>> > in ALAC, not have the same set of people speaking in name of more ALSes.
>> > So, I am personally against this proposal, not for the complexity of
>> > the change, but because it will move us in the wrong direction.
>> > Cheers,
>> > R.
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> > EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss
>> >
>> > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> EURO-Discuss mailing list
>> EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss
>> 
>> Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>EURO-Discuss mailing list
>EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss
>
>Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
>
>

EuroDIG Secretariat
http://www.eurodig.org/
mobile +41 79 204 83 87
Skype: Wolf-Ludwig

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

Profile on LinkedIn
http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig



More information about the EURO-Discuss mailing list