Proyección y Participación SC

[karlenef en gmail.com]

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

 Asunto: Re: Proyección y Participación SC 
 De: karlenef en gmail.com

 Estimado Alberto, 


 Pertenezco a la UWI. Gracias por adelantado. 


 Sinceramente, 
 karlene Francisco 




> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: <asoto en ibero-americano.org>
> Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
> To: lac-discuss-en en atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Cc: lac-discuss-en en atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
>
>
> [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
>
>  Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC
>  from: asoto en ibero-americano.org
>
>  In order to complete the order Karlene, you would be so kind as to tell
> me to ALS belong?
>  Thank you.
>  Alberto Soto
>
>
>  Sent from my ASUS
>
>
>  -------- Original message --------
>  From: karlenef en gmail.com
>  Posted: Thu, February 18, 2016 8:37:55 -0300
>  To: lac-discuss-es en atlarge-lists.icann.org
>  Cc: lac-discuss-en en atlarge-lists.icann.org
>  Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
>  >
>  > [[- Translated text (es -&gt; en) -]]
>  >
> > Asunto: Re: Alcance y Compromiso SC
> > De: karlenef en gmail.com
> >
> > Estimado Alberto,
> >
> >
> > Es lamentable que todavía existen tan enorme nivel de desconfianza en
> LACRALO. La situación es ahora insostenible. Por favor retire mi nombre de
> todas las listas de correo. No deseo ser un miembro de este grupo.
> >
> >
> > Saludos,
> > karlene Francisco
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 17 Feb 2016, at 7:48 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg en mcgill.ca>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Dear Alberto,
> >>
> >> I will comment on the issues of the Outreach and Engagement and CROPP
> issues separately. Despite the two groups being chaired by the same person,
> they operate under different rules and processes.
> >>
> >> Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement
> >>
> >> The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members named by each RALO
> plus any other people that chose to participate. Operationally, the SC does
> not distinguish between the two types of participants. The SC leadership is
> selected by the SC itself. See (
> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+and+Engagement
> ) for further details.
> >>
> >> There are 14 members from LACRALO, more than from any other region.
> >>
> >> Any work product of the SC should be a product of the entire SC, or at
> least those who choose to be active and participate. That certainly should
> include the official members selected by the region. The SC may decide to
> ask RALOs for input, but even if it doesn’t, it is the responsibility of
> the regional members to ensure that the region is involved. In a
> multistakeholder environment, every participant cannot get exactly what
> they want, but every participant should have an opportunity to be heard. If
> a work product is about a particular region (as it is for the CROPP
> strategies), that region clearly has a very important role to play. In the
> case of LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that the SC has Spanish
> interpretation to ensure that your members can participate equitably.
> >>
> >> To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint from
> within the SC that people are not being listened to.
> >>
> >> The Independence of RALOs, like most things in life, is not absolute.
> In many cases, an ALAC SC or WG carries out work on behalf of ALAC and
> At-Large. They do this with the participation of people from all regions.
> Generally these decisions or documents do not impact what a RALO can do,
> but occasionally the ALAC gives a SC explicit responsibility to take action
> on behalf of ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not go back to the
> ALAC for ratification.
> >>
> >> In the specific case of the CROPP strategy document, I am not an
> expert, but I do not see a wide difference between the resultant document
> and what I have heard is of specific interest to LACRALO. The exact words
> may be different, but the intent seems the same. But regardless of how I
> read it, IF the region has a problem, it should be dealt with within the SC
> and by those appointed by LACRALO to work on the SC. If there is a
> situation where the SC members and the Chair and Co-Chairs cannot resolve
> an issue, I expect it to be presented to me or the ALAC Leadership Team,
> ensuring that the ALT Member from the region is aware of the issue.
> >>
> >> You mention that the internal LACRALO document had more concrete
> details. That is quite reasonable. As I understand the situation, the plans
> to be submitted to GSE did not require that level of detail and
> implementation. As long as the two were complementary and did not conflict,
> there is no problem.
> >>
> >> CROPP Program
> >>
> >> Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was carried out by the
> CROPP Review Team (RT) from the previous year. The current RT is composed
> of two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of the Finance
> and Budget Subcommittee, and one by the Members of the Outreach and
> Engagement SC.
> >>
> >> A requests for use of CROPP funds goes from the originator to the RALO
> and then to the CROPP RT. Exactly how the RALO approves a project is up to
> the RALO. I suspect that most RALOs do this with their leadership team and
> perhaps a few others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by RALO leadership that
> a request is approved by the RALO, the CROPP RT must review it. They have
> the duty to ensure that the request meets the regional strategy and is in
> all ways a good request. If they are not satisfied, they can either reject
> the request or refer it back to the originator or RALO for modification. My
> understanding is that the LACRALO trip to Haiti and the Dominican Republic
> was satisfactory and I do not see the need to review the process it
> followed at this time.
> >>
> >> For the record, Dev Anand Teelucksingh did not travel to Buenos Aires
> on CROPP funds. His trip was funded by GSE under a completely different
> program.
> >>
> >> I hope that this addresses all of your issues.
> >>
> >> Regards, Alan
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>> TRANSLATION BY SILVIA VIVANCO:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Dear Alan, I am obliged as President of LACRALO to get in touch about
> this issue:
> >>>
> >>> The insistence of the Chairman of a Subcommittee of the ALAC
> (Outreach and Engagement SC ) in making decisions  which should, by
> regulation be made inside of LACRALO and with full participation of its
> members ALSs, compels me to do so.
> >>> Repeated clarifications do not justify such a decision.
> >>>
> >>> Comments from Pisanty and myself have been cited as if they were an
> approval of the Plan generated in the O/E Subcommittee, which acted without
> previously consulting the document which we already had prepared. Both
> mine, and the opinion of Alejandro Pisanty were critical of such document.
> >>> Subsequently, and despite the bad procedure, we, in display of good
> will and seeking peace in our Region, accepted this plan, despite the fact
> that ours had more concrete details about the countries, according to the
> list that I promptly submitted, and long before this Strategic Plan.
> >>>
> >>> The main detail was that the plan  should take into account as a
> priority,  those countries that had the lowest rate of Internet
> penetration, as a way to start that required greater support and major
> actions to coordinate with ICANN GSE.
> >>> I asked for clarifications to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on our
> last monthly meeting. At that meeting, he not only insisted on his mistake,
> but he confirmed that  the persons forming such Subcommittee would be in
> charge of the implementation of such plan and they were also analyzing the
> alternatives of the CROPP Program for its implementation by of such
> Subcommittee.
> >>>
> >>> In summary: first an ALS presents a project,  which shall be approved
> by consensus within LACRALO and then leadership of LACRALO sends it for
> approval through the CROPP program and then to GSE.
> >>>
> >>> They are assuming a power which does not correspond to them, even
> though I  requested by email and at the last monthly meeting that they did
> not.
> >>>
> >>> He also insisted that the Sub-Committee was formed by members of
> LACRALO, erroneously understanding this validated  such actions.
> >>>
> >>> The MOU that LACRALO has signed with ICANN, gives us the independence
> in decisions, which should be taken within the scope of our Region and
> within our normative discussions area, not within a Sub-Committee of ALAC,
> despite the fact that this is composed of members of LACRALO.
> >>>
> >>> In the links listed in the email below, you can see that a similar
> program for AFRALO was approved by the members of AFRALO on September 21,
> 2015; of APRALO by their leaders on July 3, 2015;  of NARALO by Glenn
> McKnight 4l 4 August 2015;  of EURALO by Dev Anand Teelucksingh the 29th
> September 2015;  and the LACRALO also by Dev Anand Teelucksingh on
> September 15, 2015. At least for LACRALO, he has taken a role which does
> not correspond to him.
> >>>
> >>> In the emails cited by  the Chair of the Subcommittee, there are
> inconsistencies such as the exchange of emails for the proposal by Carlton
> Samuels to go to Surinam; this was only presented by Dev Anand Teelucksingh
> in the meeting which we had on the Haiti and Dominican Republic. There was
> such urgency that we did not have time to submit it to LACRALO and
> exceptionally we decided with Humberto at that  meeting so as to avoid
> losing  our CROPP trip allocation.
> >>>
> >>> In the meeting previous to the last meeting of ICANN in Buenos Aires,
> it is said that we agreed and published the names of who would travel to
> such meeting.
> >>>
> >>> CROPP?s  Chair,  Dev Anand Teelucksingh, published such names, but
> omitted in the list  his own name, because he travelled to Argentina with a
> travel allocation of such program.
> >>>
> >>> To safeguard our decisions, our autonomy and hoping to avoid future
> inconvenient, I request that  you proceed to issue the appropriate
>  Directive to such Subcommittee.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> At 11/01/2016 07:16 AM, Alberto Soto wrote:
> >>> Estimado Alan, me veo obligado como Presidente de LACRALO a ponerme en
> >>> contacto por este tema.
> >>>
> >>> La insistencia del Presidente de un Subcomité de ALAC (Alcance y
> compromiso
> >>> SC) en tomar decisiones que por norma deben tomarse en el interior de
> >>> LACRALO y con participación de sus ALSs miembros, me obliga a ello.
> >>> Las repetidas aclaraciones no justifican esa decisión.
> >>>
> >>> Se ha citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty y míos como si hubieran
> sido de
> >>> aprobación del Plan generado en ese subcomité sin haber consultado
> >>> previamente el documento con el que ya contábamos. Tanto la opinión
> de
> >>> Alejandro como la mía, eran críticas de tal documento. A posteriori
> y pese a
> >>> ese mal procedimiento, como muestra de buena voluntad y buscando la
> paz en
> >>> nuestra Región, dimos como aceptado dicho Plan, pese a que el nuestro
> tenía
> >>> detalles más concretos sobre los países, según la lista que yo
> oportunamente
> >>> presentara, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico. El detalle
> principal era
> >>> que se debía tener en cuenta como prioridad, a aquellos países que
> tuvieran
> >>> el menor índice de penetración de Internet, como una forma de
> comenzar por
> >>> los que requerían mayor apoyo y mayores acciones a coordinar con GSE
> de
> >>> ICANN.
> >>>
> >>> Pedí aclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomité en nuestra última
> reunión
> >>> mensual; allí no solo insistió en su error, sino que confirmó que
> las
> >>> personas integrante de dicho Subcomité se harían cargo de la
> implementación
> >>> de dicho plan, y además estaban analizado las alternativas del
> programa
> >>> CROPP para su implementación por parte de dicho Subcomité. Como
> síntesis de
> >>> este tema en particular: primero una ALS presenta un proyecto, se
> aprueba
> >>> por consenso en LACRALO y luego el liderazgo de LACRALO lo envía para
> su
> >>> aprobación al programa CROPP y de allí a GSE. Se están arrogando una
> >>> atribución que no corresponde, pese a que se pidió por mail y en la
> última
> >>> reunión mensual  que no lo hicieran.
> >>>
> >>> También insistió en que dicho subcomité estaba conformado por
> miembros de
> >>> LACRALO, entendiendo erróneamente que ello convalidaba tales acciones.
> >>> El MOU que LACRALO tiene firmado con ICANN, nos da la independencia en
> las
> >>> decisiones, las que deben tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra
> Región y en
> >>> nuestro ámbito normativo de discusiones, y no dentro de un Subcomité
> de
> >>> ALAC, pese a que esté integrado por miembros de LACRALO.
> >>>
> >>> En los links que están indicados en el mail de abajo, se puede ver
> que el
> >>> programa similar de AFRALO fue aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO el
> 21 de
> >>> septiembre de 2015; el de APRALO por sus líderes el 3 de julio de
> 2015;  el
> >>> de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015;  el de EURALO
> por  Dev
> >>> Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015;  y el de LACRALO
> también por
> >>> Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por
> LACRALO, se
> >>> ha tomado una atribución que no le corresponde.
> >>>
> >>> En los mail citados por el Presidente del subcomité, hay
> inconsistencias
> >>> tales como el intercambio de correos para la propuesta de Carlton
> Samuels
> >>> para ir a Surinam; esto solo fue presentado por   Dev Anand
> Teelucksingh en
> >>> una reunión que mantuvimos por el tema de Haití y República
> Dominica. Era
> >>> con tal urgencia que no tuvimos tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y
> >>> excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en esa reunión para no
> perder un
> >>> viaje de CROPP. En la reunión previa al último meeting de ICANN en
> Buenos
> >>> Aires, se cita que concordamos y fueron publicados los nombres de
> quienes
> >>> viajarían a dicho meeting. El Presidente del CROPP,  Dev Anand
> Teelucksingh
> >>> publicó dichos nombres, pero omitió en la lista  el suyo propio,
> dado que
> >>> viajó con una vacante de dicho programa.
> >>>
> >>> Por el resguardo de nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomía, y
> esperando
> >>> evitar futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la directiva
> >>> correspondiente a ese Subcomité.
> >>>
> >>> Saludos cordiales
> >>>
> >>> Alberto Soto
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> lac-discuss-en mailing list
> >> lac-discuss-en en atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>



[[--Original text (en)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/acf685dab7.html
--]]