[NA-Discuss] Notes from a Retired ALAC Member

Mon Feb 5 05:02:09 EST 2007

All,

 >> You need to know that ICANN has a very narrow, rather geeky, mission.

I thought that ICANN's mission was what the Internet Community wants it 
to be. I also think people need to move beyond discouraging 
participation on the basis of a restricted mission. If one is clear on 
ICANN's role, does that mean one is only allowed to talk about ICANN 
issues? I talked about finance even though I was working in an 
environmental community in my past role. Of course environment was my 
primary role, but by putting yourself in a silo do you risk cutting 
yourself off from potentially valuable information and networks?

 >> I have to express disappointment about working with ICANN
 >> staff in the past.

I am also on board as staff to aid Nick and yourselves. I have a long 
history of assisting committees at an International level. The global 
partnerships team aims to create a significant commitment to improving 
responsiveness and service.

 >> It's true ALAC can have its say, but the "catch" is that
 >> ICANN doesn't have to listen, nor does it ever have to ask
 >> the users for advice.

This is also true of the Government Advisory Committee, however an 
analysis published more than a year ago of GAC recommendations suggested 
that most of their recommendations were accepted. My sense is that the 
reason for this is partly that governments are governments, but also a 
recognition of the number of governments participating. If ALAC could 
claim similar legitimacy surely it would be able to make a stronger 
case? This is where the question of transparency and accountability that 
Robert mentioned extends beyond ICANN staff, to the community itself. I 
am not often clear on the affiliations, motivations, etc. of many of the 
people I interact with at ICANN.

----

Luc Faubert wrote:
> Jean,
> 
> Thanks a lot for sharing your experience. I think your notes provide us with real useful directions,
> 
> 
> _________________________________________
> Luc Faubert
> Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du changement / 
> IT governance and change management consulting
> GFI Solutions
> +1 514 236 5129
> www.GFISolutions.com
> 
> www.LucFaubert.com
> www.isoc.qc.ca
> www.ccig.ca
> www.maillons.qc.ca
> 
>  
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
>> [mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf 
>> Of Jean Armour Polly
>> Sent: 3 février 2007 15:43
>> To: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> Subject: [NA-Discuss] Notes from a Retired ALAC Member
>>
>> Hi-- I want to say a few things as the outgoing NA ALAC rep 
>> from the Nomcom process. I served on ALAC for two years, with 
>> my colleagues Wendy and John. It was great and I had a 
>> wonderful time and learned a lot.
>>
>> I came onto ALAC hoping to really try and add the end user's 
>> voice to the mix. I found ALAC in disarray. I started the 
>> icannalac website, I started a web-base voting tool, and 
>> basically concentrated on shoring up the infrastructure. 
>> Before my term ended in December 2006 I was even advocating a 
>> NARALO face to face meeting in spring 2007. But my term ended 
>> and I am not affiliated with any ALS. I entered as a real 
>> optimist; I left still hopeful but, well, disillusioned.
>>
>> You need to know that ICANN has a very narrow, rather geeky, mission. 
>> http://www.icann.org/new.html It is very boring to most 
>> people. Some people get involved with ICANN hoping it is 
>> something else. If you're hoping to fight spam or something, 
>> you're in the wrong place. Try IGF. http://www.intgovforum.org/
>>
>> Things I learned:
>> ICANN needs a "user's voice" to appear on its hierarchy 
>> chart. This lets the U.S. Department of Commerce (with which 
>> ICANN has a MoU - memorandum of Understanding--to actually 
>> assign names and numbers, etc 
>> http://icann.org/general/agreements.htm ) think that end 
>> users actually have a say in what happens with those names 
>> and numbers.
>>
>> It's true ALAC can have its say, but the "catch" is that 
>> ICANN doesn't have to listen, nor does it ever have to ask 
>> the users for advice. (Remember the name is the At Large 
>> ADVISORY Committee, so theoretically we're special). Sure 
>> they routinely ask for comments on
>> things-- but not directly to ALAC--they issue a general 
>> request for comments from the entire Internet community. In 
>> reality, I am not convinced that a communique from ALAC holds 
>> any more weight than a comment from an interested individual. 
>> The ICANN board seldom even acknowledged receipt of our 
>> official memoranda on issues.
>>
>> So-- the "advisory" part has been ignored by ICANN, for the 
>> most part, in my opinion. Others may disagree.
>>
>> So what's the most important thing ALAC does? Actually, there 
>> are at least four things:
>> 1. It appoints 5 members of the Nomcom. 
>> http://nomcom.icann.org/ The Nomcom is the real 
>> kingmaker--selecting  a portion of the ICANN board seatholders.
>> In the 2 years I was on, we appointed all outside people as 
>> our reps to the Nomcom. Only this year we discovered that 
>> ALAC members could fill these roles. I think this would be an 
>> excellent idea.
>>
>> 2. The ICANN Board is where the power is. ALAC has one 
>> non-voting seat on it, but it doesn't mean that the 
>> representative can't participate in discussions. (I believe, 
>> though, that the non-voting seatholders cannot serve on any 
>> committees.). Many of us believe that ALAC should have AT 
>> LEAST one voting seat on the ICANN board. Work for it.
>>
>> 3. ALAC can call for an "Issues Report." ICANN staff must 
>> then research a particular topic and write a report outlining 
>> the various issues and stakeholders involved in the 
>> particular issue. Issues Reports are important because they 
>> can be the first step in the Policy Development Process (PDP). 
>> http://www.icann.org/general/archive-bylaws/bylaws-08apr05.htm#AnnexA
>> In Wellington (last March), ALAC asked for an issue report on 
>> Domain Name Tasting (add-drop grace period). Well, OK, ALAC 
>> couldn't decide if it wanted to start a PDP, so we asked for 
>> a staff advisory or something more watered-down than that. 
>> After months of delay we got a very short report that added 
>> nothing to our knowledge of the topic. 
>> ALAC staff at that time was an independent contractor with 
>> ICANN. I believe ALAC is still hoping to ask for a real 
>> issues report as a precursor to the PDP on the whole add-drop 
>> grace period mess. I know it came up again on a recent list 
>> posting and Bret replied he was working on something. The PDP 
>> is also where power resides. Use it.
>>
>> 4. Disseminate information on ICANN--   that means "warts and all." 
>> There are a lot of good people working in ICANN roles, but 
>> many times ...well, things just don't work right. Some say 
>> "there is no 'ICANN'--ICANN is just people." Hold that 
>> thought, but keep ICANN honest.
>>
>> I have to express disappointment about working with ICANN 
>> staff in the past. Although (congrats!) Nick is the new 
>> Executive Director of At-Large, and hopefully things will now 
>> be entirely different, he's still working under staff members 
>> that have been there for a long time. In my tenure on ALAC, 
>> there were many times some people (but not everyone) on ALAC 
>> felt that staff was actually working against it, trying to 
>> keep ALAC at the fringes and keep it from actually doing 
>> anything important. The allocation of the At Large budget is 
>> one way this happens. Make no mistake--At Large is more than 
>> just ALAC and the money is spent many ways. Make sure you 
>> understand how to make sure that the large budget allotted to 
>> At Large actually flows to the betterment of end-users. Don't 
>> do anything that is contrary to ALAC's mission. And 
>> again--keep ICANN honest.
>>
>> Hope this helps. It's not really clear what role RALOs will 
>> play, except to appoint ALAC members from the regions. As far 
>> as dissemination of info goes-- I think that's a requirement 
>> to be an ALS, so putting a RALO info structure in-between 
>> ALAC and the ALS's themselves doesn't seem to make much sense 
>> to me. RALO to RALO interaction may be more important though. 
>> I think it's important to get RALO reps to the ICANN meetings 
>> (spend that At-Large budget!). 
>> Again, be aware that what ICANN actually does and can do is 
>> so very technical that most people are bored to death. It's 
>> hard to get the end user interested--yet it is critically 
>> important to them. So, find a way to do that.
>>
>> best wishes, JP
>> --
>> Jean Armour Polly
>> http://www.netmom.com/
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NA-Discuss mailing list
>> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atl
> arge-lists.icann.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
> 