[lac-discuss-en] An Alternative to the EMM model proposed in the At-Large Review

[Dev Anand Teelucksingh]

Thanks Alejandro for the feedback.

The At-Large community is already a form of membership model. In the ICANN
bylaws at
https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en , the heading
under Section 12.2 (d) (ix) is "Membership in the At-Large Community"

An At-Large chapter will simply bring persons from organizations in a
country together to serve a unified purpose - just like how a
Multistakeholder Stakeholder Group (MAG) comes together to organise a
National IGF. It isn't about creating new organisations for the sake of
creating organisations.

Regarding ISOC having multiple chapters in a country, if there is a large
enough number of persons signed up and participating in At-Large on behalf
of the interests of Internet end users within a country, then perhaps
multiple At-Large chapters in a country could be considered. I suspect
potential ISOC chapters in a country had to prove they had sufficient
numbers to warrant creating another ISOC chapter when there was already a
chapter in the country.

Dev Anand


On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 11:35 AM, Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch <
apisan at unam.mx> wrote:

> Dev,
>
> the proposed model of "ICANN At-Large Chapters" in each country is a step
> towards a membership-based ICANN, which is a no-go.
>
> It is a top-down model that creates new organizations instead of bringing
> together existing organizations. This is troublesome in itself and also
> negates the "Web of Trust" model which lies at the foundation of At-Large
> representation. I consider that this model is still important and that the
> "At-Large Chapters" model is not an improvement.
>
> I understand from your note that each country would have a single Chapter.
> Is that correct?
>
> Again that is not what the Rotary or ISOC do. While ISOC prefers a single
> chapter per country, large, diverse countries like India or Canada have
> more than one. And certainly Rotary have numerous clubs, sometimes even
> more than one in a single city.
>
> Yours,
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>      Dr. Alejandro Pisanty
> Facultad de Química UNAM
> Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
>
>
>
> +52-1-5541444475 <+52%201%2055%204144%204475> FROM ABROAD
>
> +525541444475 <+52%2055%204144%204475> DESDE MÉXICO SMS +525541444475
> <+52%2055%204144%204475>
> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com
> LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty
> Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/
> 22285/4A106C0C8614
> Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty
> ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org
> .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .
> ------------------------------
> *Desde:* lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [
> lac-discuss-en-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Dev Anand
> Teelucksingh [devtee at gmail.com]
> *Enviado el:* lunes, 06 de febrero de 2017 06:26
> *Hasta:* LACRALO discussion list
> *Asunto:* [lac-discuss-en] An Alternative to the EMM model proposed in
> the At-Large Review
>
> I sent this in December last year to the LACRALO members of the At-Large
> Review Party. It outlines an alternative to the proposed EMM model in the
> At-Large Review.
>
> Dev Anand
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee at gmail.com>
> Date: Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:19 PM
> Subject: Response to the draft At-Large Review document - please consider
> and forward to the ITEMS or discuss in the At-Large review call
> To: Fatima Cambronero <fatimacambronero at gmail.com>, Alberto Soto <
> asoto at ibero-americano.org>, Aida Noblia <aidanoblia at gmail.com>, Carlton
> Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com>, Vanda UOL <vanda at uol.com.br>, Holly
> Raiche <h.raiche at internode.on.net>
>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Since time is short, I want to focus on the proposed EMM in the draft
> At-Large Review.
>
> My thoughts - The proposed EMM has flaws. Some immediate ones :
> - it destroys the community and with that, the consensus building of
> community with replacement
> of individuals with even less ties to the public community. Such
> individuals will promote and collude with other individuals to keep
> themselves in the loop. Also, with many of the policy discussions in GNSO
> being English, this permanently eliminates persons from developing/emerging
> economies from non-English from ever participating.
> - given that any individual could already participate in GNSO, we would be
> no different from such random individuals
> - it removes the mandate on oversight and accountability on ICANN
> activities from end user interests
> - a thousand individuals in one large country will override 10 individuals
> from a small country  so there will be less diversity in the EMM model only
> from those countries with large number of  individuals.
> - Nomcom appointees to ALAC new to ICANN will serve as Liasions to other
> groups is not sensible
>
> There are many more problems but I want to focus on a IMO a better
> At-Large model than the EMM one:
>
> - ICANN establishes At-Large Chapters in each country similiar in concept
> to Rotary or ISOC chapters.
> - each chapter is open to anyone interested in ICANN from the interests of
> end users.
> - ICANN can set guidelines for each chapter - some examples: must do
> certain level of outreach, have term limits, have a public F2F awareness
> meeting to recruit new persons. ICANN would need to provide some funding to
> make this happen but this would be small and the chapters can account to
> ICANN for expenses.
> - ICANN can provide the tools (mailing lists, conference tools) to
> facilitate online discussions.
> - Because there is a consistent brand - At-Large Chapter in the country,
> marketing/promoting is
> greatly simplified and easier to explain.
> - Given that such chapters are virtual, it makes chapters easy to
> establish with only a few individuals from a country without the challenges
> of having formal organisations with bylaws and pay taxes.
>
> So an At-Large chapter ends up being a virtual ALS in each country in the
> ALAC/RALO/ALS model.
>
> The RALOs will consist of the chapters from each country in the region
> with each chapter electing two persons to coordinate the RALO work. The
> RALO will be better positioned to better fulfil its MOUs with ICANN and the
> RALO and ALAC would not have to bother with analysing whether an
> organisation meets the criteria of an ALS.
>
> The At-Large chapters will be better able to network with At-Large
> chapters in other countries and build consensus on policy issues and help
> promote and grow the At-Large Community.
>
> Dev Anand
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/attachments/20170213/b3710d2e/attachment.html>