[lac-discuss-en] =? Iso-8859-1? Q? Rv = 3A_Libro_Blanco_de_At Large_-_-? == Iso-8859-1? Q? Sobre_los_desaf = EDos_futuros? =

fatimacambronero at gmail.com fatimacambronero at gmail.com
Fri Dec 28 05:33:21 UTC 2012 

[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]

 Subject: Re: =? Iso-8859-1? Q? Rv = 3A_Libro_Blanco_de_At Large_-_-? == Iso-8859-1? Q? Sobre_los_desaf = EDos_futuros? = 
 From: fatimacambronero at gmail.com

 Alberto, all 




 I join this thread to make a comment on the working groups 
 we LACRALO force in our region and in right now. 




 Currently we operate within the Working Group LACRALO 
 Planning the reunin Estratgico that ICANN nation of Costa Rica, 
 alongside those of Translation An Governance and communication. These are groups of 
 Working exclusively formed LACRALO LACRALO members and 
 born of our meetings with the facilitator in Costa Rica and 
 were intended to improve the working participaciny and between 
 LACRALO members. I understand that this working group as estliderando 
 Alejandro Pisanty (corrjanme please if I'm wrong because I am not 
 portion thereof). 




 On the other hand there is the Working Group LAC Regional Strategy, 
 led by Rodrigo de la Parra, newly formed and shaped by 
 delegates from different groups or communities that are 
 represented within ICANN from our region. In this 
 belong to the same manner, members of our region involved 
 GAC, which are part of LACNIC, LACTLD, ccTLDs, BC, former members 
 ICANN Board (Vanda and Alexander who also are members of 
 LACRALO), and Dev and I like LACRALO delegates in that group. As already 
 mentioned at other times our role is to be a link between the 
 questions, comments, contributions from members and the group LACRALO 
 LAC Regional Strategy. That's why we have requested their comments 
 to take allcomo LACRALO contributions. This WG had its first 
 teleconference last Friday. 


 Tomorrow we will be sending to the list of LACRALO a report of that 
 called.


 The documents are drafts have shared over which 
 we will work in this group and are developed based on input 
 obtained from a survey that was distributed throughout our region. Is 
 why in these documents are not STILL priorities or 
 methods of medicin of these priorities as Alberto indicas because 
 formally freshly group had a single encounter which defined the 
 objectives of this working group, the methodology and timing thereof 
 Delivery of results. 




 Therefore all contributions that tell us that we must carry this 
 Strategy working group of LAC, as you described it Alberto, 
 welcome and will be thankful that this is the way we have 
 scheduled to work: a permanent communication between the two spaces. 




 Any questions or queries, I am at your disposal to answer or 
 clarify if this mail has left sb point that needs to be expanded. 




 Best regards, 


 Fatima 




 The 28 December 2012 00:49, Alberto Soto 
<asoto at ibero-americano.org> wrote: 


> Estimado José, estoy de acuerdo con tus comentarios. Estoy en el grupo de
> Estrategia Regional y la lectura seguro es muy útil, pero el grupo no está
> muy colaborativo para poder avanzar rápidamente. Respecto del Plan
> Estratégico, no sé qué metodología se aplicó para generarlo, dado que hay
> objetivos que se vienen repitiendo y quizás no se logran tal como se busca.
> Esto puede significar una falla en la prioridad asignada a cada ítem
> estratégico, si se trabajó con una metodología que la requiere.
> El grupo actual que está trabajando en este tema (no están representando
> Fátima y Dev) , ha publicado algo para opinar, pero no indica prioridades
> ni
> métodos de medición de dichas prioridades, lo cual puede genera que no se
> cumpla correctamente con el plan estratégico.
>
> Saludos cordiales
>
> Alberto Soto
>
> -----Mensaje original-----
> De: lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> [mailto:lac-discuss-es-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de José
> Francisco Arce
> Enviado el: jueves, 27 de diciembre de 2012 08:46 p.m.
> Para: Juan Manuel Rojas
> CC: LACRALO Español
> Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-es] Rv: Libro Blanco de At-Large - sobre los
> desafíos futuros
>
> Gracias Juan por los aportes !!!!
>
> Aprovecho y quiero comentarles que sería de gran utilidad a los
> representantes del grupo de estratégia regional que puedan participar, ya
> que el documento les servirá para esa tarea.
>
> Saludos
>
> José Arce.-
>
>
> El 27 de diciembre de 2012 17:54, Juan Manuel Rojas
> <jumaropi at yahoo.com>escribió:
>
> > Estimados todos!
> > Envío los comentarios a lo enviado por José, también lo encontrarán
> > publicado en la Wiki:
> > https://community.icann.org/display/LACRALO/Como+Lograr+que+la+ICANN+s
> > ea+Relevante%2C+Respetada+y+tenga+Capacidad+de+Respuesta?focusedCommen
> > tId=39420763&#comment-39420763
> >
> > 1) El Interés Público Global;
> > Estoy de acuerdo con lo anteriormente mencionado por José en este
> > apartado. Creo que algo que podemos agregar es lo siguiente:
> >
> >  En el plan estratégico mencionado, dentro de una de las áreas
> > estratégicas de enfoque denominada “Un ecosistema saludable de
> > gobernanza de Internet”  algunos objetivos estratégicos son Facilidad
> > de participación global e incrementar la diversidad de trabajo de
> > partes interesadas y entre partes interesadas.  Sin olvidar que dentro
> > de los roles de la Junta está lo siguiente: “The fundamental
> > responsibility of Directors (as defined
> > below) is to exercise their business judgment to act in what they
> > reasonably believe to be the best interests of ICANN and in the global
> > public interest, taking account of the interests of the Internet
> > community as a whole rather than any individual group or interest.”
> >
> > 2) El Modelo de Múltiples Partes Interesadas – Una  elección a futuro;
> > De acuerdo con lo expuesto. Solo agregar que se involucren más con las
> > comunidades internas de ICANN, como las RALOS y que se fortalezca.
> > Como recomendación sería interesante que las resoluciones del GAC
> > pudieran ser públicas también.
> >
> > 3) Gobernanza Global, De acuerdo con lo expuesto.
> >
> > 4) Cooperación Institucional y Práctica. De acuerdo con lo expuesto.
> > _______________________________________________
> > lac-discuss-es mailing list
> > lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
> >
> > http://www.lacralo.org
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-es mailing list
> lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
> http://www.lacralo.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> lac-discuss-es mailing list
> lac-discuss-es at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es
>
> http://www.lacralo.org
>






 * Fatima Cambronero * 
 Attorney-Argentina 


 Phone: +54 9351 5282 668 
 Twitter: @ facambronero 
 Skype: fatima.cambronero 


 * Join the LACRALO / ICANN discussions: * 
 https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es 


 * Join the discussions Diplo Internet Governance Community: * 
 http://www.diplointernetgovernance.org/ 


 * Join to the Internet Society (ISOC): * http://www.internetsociety.org/ 
 _______________________________________________ 



[[--Original text (es)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/f001abac84.html
--]]

More information about the lac-discuss-en mailing list