Proyecto de mejoras de ALAC / At-Large - actualización importante

Jue Oct 13 15:04:45 UTC 2011

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

 Asunto: Re: Proyecto de mejoras de ALAC / At-Large - actualización importante 
 A partir de: carlton.samuels en gmail.com

 Wolf escribió: 
 &quot;La deliberación clave debe ser: Los estándares de profesionalismo y esperamos que 
 y la demanda de los demás, tenemos que cumplir en primera persona (típico 
 trampa de credibilidad ;-).&quot; 

 Sí, señor Wolf. 1. 

 Carlton 

 ============================== 
 Carlton A Samuels 
 Móvil: 876-818-1799 
 * Estrategia, Planificación, Gobierno, Evaluación y plazos de entrega * 
 ============================= 

 El Jue, Oct 12, 2011 a las 10:56 AM, Wolf Ludwig 
<wolf.ludwig en comunica-ch.net> escribió: 

> Hi all,
>
> I share Evan's basic question: "accountable to who?" and subsequent
> considerations. And I would say: In a broader sense to the Internet users in
> general, in a causal sense to the regional community that selected them =
> the RALOs concerned by such an under-performing candidate should be "in
> charge" of any potential "sanction" mechanisms because the two *RALO
> selected* ALAC members are - first and foremost - accountable to their
> electorate. A defective performance of a regional representative / ALAC
> member affects performance and reputation of the particular region and
> cannot be in their interest = be tolerated over a certain span of time
> (except for serious circumstances such as sickness and the like).
>
> I understand Carlton's reservations against sanctions or punishments of
> volunteers but as soon as limited seats (15 or 2 per region) and financial
> (travel etc.) resources are associated with a volunteer's engagement, the
> mandated person and his community have a special responsibility and
> accountability towards ALAC and ICANN. Otherwise, we cannot fulfill our role
> and commitments - what we stand for - diligently representing the users at
> ICANN.
>
> The key deliberation must be: The standards and professionalism we expect
> and demand from others, we must fulfill ourselves at first hand (typical
> trap of credibility ;-).
>
> Best,
> Wolf
>
>
> Evan Leibovitch wrote Tue, 11 Oct 2011 19:39:
> >On 11 October 2011 19:04, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl en gih.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Take imaginary example candidate A, ALAC member, does not attend calls,
> >> does not attend meetings, or when he travels, uses their time outside of
> >> the ALAC room. A does not get involved in ALAC & other working groups. A
> >> is basically using their affiliation to ALAC as something that looks
> >> good on their CV. Admittedly, this is an extreme, but Carlton, at the
> >> moment, nothing can be done about that person, and that imaginary person
> >> is occupying a seat on the ALAC, one of the only 15 seats of people
> >> supposed to act in the best interests of the 2.1Bn Internet users out
> >> there. That person is failing those 2.1Bn people. That person is not
> >> accountable.
> >>
> >I guess the big question -- at least MY big question -- is, accountable to
> >who?
> >
> >If that person was sent by a RALO, the RALO should be able to handle this
> >issue through a recall or other similar measure.
> >
> >If the person was appointed by the NomCom, the procedure is different but
> a
> >mechanism is still required. By definition a NomCom ALAC appointee is not
> >accountable to ALAC or the region, however it reflects badly on the NomCom
> >and ICANN itself if non-performing ALAC members are chosen and allowed to
> >under-serve for an entire two-year term.
> >
> >What bothers me the most is the prospect of ALAC passing judgment over its
> >own members. If a RALO elects someone who reflects their viewpoint, and
> that
> >viewpoint is that only a small number of issues matter, this is indeed the
> >RALO's choice to make and ALAC has no right to engage in top-down
> >second-guessing. Education and persuasion, certainly, but not sanctions.
> >
> >I fully agree on requesting that every RALO has some kind of recall
> >mechanism for their elected officials -- not just ALAC members but also
> RALO
> >chairs, secretariats and liaisons as applicable. Indeed I have long
> >advocated this within my own RALO. I am also greatly in favour of staff's
> >providing attendance and other performance metrics that allow a RALO to
> act
> >appropriately on factual inputs. But I am very much against any scheme
> that
> >has ALAC members being accountable to other ALAC members.
> >
> >It's bad enough that the ICANN Board has no legal, fiduciary duty to the
> >public, but only to ICANN itself. Let's not justify, let alone propagate
> >that mistake within our own bounds.
> >
> >But in any case, this debate is premature. We're at an intermediate
> >> stage, with more than 50 recommendations in this report, some of which
> >> are completed, some of which need to be taken to the next stage. The
> >> debate on sanctions/no sanctions will happen later.
> >
> >
> >I don't think there's any problem with that. As I've mentioned, it's
> simply
> >that the wording in the report right now could easily be interpreted by a
> >casual reader to infer that we have already had the discussion, agreed on
> a
> >regime of sanctions, and are simply discussing appropriate implementation
> >going forward. WE know the debate is incomplete, but that is not what the
> >report indicates.
> >
> >- Evan
> >_______________________________________________
> >ALAC mailing list
> >ALAC en atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
> >
> >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> >ALAC Working Wiki:
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> >
>
> 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
>

[[--Original text (en)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/b1c3b29fbf.html
--]]