[lac-discuss-es] Una alternativa al modelo EMM propuesto en la Revista At-Large

devtee en gmail.com devtee en gmail.com
Lun Feb 13 14:00:21 UTC 2017


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

 Asunto: Re: Una alternativa al modelo EMM propuesto en la Revista At-Large 
 De: devtee en gmail.com

 Gracias Bartlett. 
 Para responder a sus preguntas, tal como lo veo: 
 - un ALS virtual / At-Large Capítulo tendría que seleccionar / electo 
 representantes en la ELA virtual para representar el Capítulo At-Large en 
 los asuntos de RALO. Yo estaba sugiriendo que dado que los aspectos línea de 
 la ALS virtual / At-Large capítulo podría ser hecho por la ICANN (como el correo 
 listas, conferencias en línea, sitio web de alojamiento, con derecho a voto en línea, At-Large wiki 
 cuentas), entonces no habría necesidad de registrar formalmente una 
 organización en un país que entonces tendría que pagar impuestos. No es que una 
 ALS virtuales no tendrían reglas. 
 - Las personas en el capítulo de alcance serían elegibles para participar en 
 At-Large o correr para las posiciones en At-Large. Para las posiciones en At-Large, tales 
 personas pueden ser propuestos por cualquier capítulo de At-Large en el ralo y la RALO 
 a continuación votos con cada capítulo de At-Large tener una votación en la RALO si 
 consenso en la RALO no se puede lograr.Un capítulo de At-Large debería tener 
 consenso en cuanto a quién quiere apoyar, pero si no, peor de los casos, no puede 
 ser un proceso electoral en el capítulo de At-Large de quién es el capítulo 
 apoyará. 
 - Las personas que quieran unirse a At-Large se alentaría Grupos de Trabajo 
 para unirse al Capítulo At-Large en su país si quieren ser considerados 
 para ser seleccionados para representar el ralo y colaborar mejor con otra 
 personas de mentalidad similar en su país implicado en At-Large. Dada la facilidad 
 de unir, no habría menos razones para que un individuo no adherirse a una 
 At-Large Capítulo 


 dev Anand 


 El Lun 6 Feb, 2017 a 24:14, Bartlett Morgan <me en bartlettmorgan.com>
 escribió: 


> Hello all,
>
> My initial thoughts on this alternative model:
>
>
>
> If we are speaking of fundamentals as the starting point for a discussion,
> I do not agree that the notion of an ALS – as currently applied - is
> *fundamental* to the work of At-Large. In the broader scheme of things, the
> only fundamental, in my humble opinion, is the representation of the
> end-user’s interests. (This is not a hard and fast view and I would welcome
> contrary views to expand my thinking on it)
>
>
>
> With that as a starting point, I don’t find much fault with the idea of
> creating a single focal point in each jurisdiction from which the views of
> end-users can be gauged (for policy inputs etc) and outreach can be done.
>
>
>
> That said, I suspect that the finer details will need some more
> fine-tuning. For e.g.:
>
> ·         If the current proposal is to dispense with formalities like
> by-laws does this also, implicitly mean that each Virtual ALS (VALS) would
> have no formal local leadership?
>
> ·         How would the implementation of the VALS impact one’s ability
> to run for a position within At-Large – would the status quo remain or
> would that person have to be nominated by the VALS within the country of
> origin?
>
> ·         How, if at all, would the VALS concept impact on the current
> process of individuals joining At-Large/ICANN working groups?
>
>
>
> --
>
> Regards,
>
> Bartlett D. Morgan
>
>
>
> *From:* lac-discuss-en-bounces en atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:
> lac-discuss-en-bounces en atlarge-lists.icann.org] *On Behalf Of *Dr.
> Alejandro Pisanty Baruch
> *Sent:* Monday, February 06, 2017 11:35 AM
> *To:* Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee en gmail.com>; LACRALO discussion list <
> lac-discuss-en en atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [lac-discuss-en] An Alternative to the EMM model proposed
> in the At-Large Review
>
>
>
> 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 en atlarge-lists.icann.org [
> lac-discuss-en-bounces en atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Dev Anand
> Teelucksingh [devtee en 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 en 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 en gmail.com>, Alberto Soto <
> asoto en ibero-americano.org>, Aida Noblia <aidanoblia en gmail.com>, Carlton
> Samuels <carlton.samuels en gmail.com>, Vanda UOL <vanda en uol.com.br>, Holly
> Raiche <h.raiche en 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
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



[[--Original text (en)
http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/1c3c4fdec6.html
--]]




Más información sobre la lista de distribución lac-discuss-es