[NA-Discuss] Potential Meeting in Vancouver

Thu Feb 8 11:11:35 EST 2007

At 08/02/2007 10:19 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>Question:
>
>Alan, you stated that “I think that for a NARALO 
>to have a chance of succeeding, there needs to 
>be more US-based ALSs in existence and 
>participating in the RALO creation 
>process.”  Why, specifically, US-based ALSs for a chance of succeeding?

The US is 90% of the population. In my opinion, 
we need a significant number of US ALSs to be 
considered representative of North America and I 
do not think that having a RALO primarily 
populated by Canadian groups will help the US ALS 
cause. Perhaps unfortunate, but that is my 
opinion unless someone can convince me otherwise.

>
>Also, I definitely agree with Michael Maranda’s 
>opinions.  We are not trying to create some 
>complicated structure as I understand has been 
>done in the past – just attempting to form up 
>under the processes that are in place at this 
>time..  Personally, I thought that it would be 
>important for the Canadian ALSs and US ALSs to 
>get together since some of our US counterparts 
>have more experience in this group than some of 
>the newer ones coming in from Canada.  There 
>would be valuable information to share and, 
>perhaps, give us better focus in order to be 
>more effective.  Also, I never really saw the 
>Vancouver meeting as being the definitive 
>meeting to create the NA RALO but more of a 
>preliminary one to bring everybody up to speed.

There are two points here, whether face-to-face 
meetings will help the cause, and whether the 
proposed Vancouver was a good idea.

Taking the second point first, I agree that this 
meeting would NOT have been the "definitive" 
NARALO meeting. Unfortunately, precedent with 
other regions indicates that ICANN has been 
willing to fund just one such organizational 
meeting. And no one from ICANN has indicated 
otherwise for North America. Which is why I said 
that I supported ICANN funding this meeting *IF* 
it was not considered the definitive NARALO organizational meeting.

Regarding the value of face-to-face meetings, I 
disagree with John. I find value in such meetings 
and I think that people work differently (and 
perhaps better) with each other after having met 
in person. Perhaps it is a generation thing - I 
have only been using e-mail for half of my life 
(starting in 1976 - 30 years ago). If I had 
started earlier in life, perhaps it would be the medium of choice.

Optimally, I would recommend a meeting early in 
the NARALO organizational process, and a second 
one towards the end. But "early" still means when 
there is already a critical mass of US-based ALSs.

>
>I guess those south of the border don’t see this 
>as being important, though.  Its rather a shame.

Perhaps.  Perhaps the message has not been 
properly communicated. Or perhaps the ALS concept 
simply has little meaning for a country which 
boasts 65 web sites for every 100 people (Canada 
is about 12, and Mexico (not part of ICANN's NA) is 3).

Perhaps since Queen Elizabeth is the official 
Chief of State of Canada, we should really be in 
the EURALO, then the US could form its own RALO.  Or not...

Alan

PS Please note that the part about the Queen and EURALO is a JOKE!!

>
>Darlene
>
>Darlene A. Thompson
>Community Access Program Administrator
>Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP
>P.O. Box 429
>Pond Inlet, NU  X0A 0S0
>Phone:  (867) 899-7363
>Fax:  (867) 899-7334
>dthompson at gov.nu.ca
>
>----------
>From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org 
>[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Alan Greenberg
>Sent: Wednesday, February 07, 2007 6:43 PM
>To: Luc Faubert; Nick Ashton-Hart; na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Potential Meeting in Vancouver
>
>I was offline most of last week, and am just starting to catch up.
>
>My position was not quite as you stated. I felt 
>that a NARALO formation meeting was not 
>appropriate at this time. I was quite happy to 
>have the meeting take place with funding from 
>ICANN, but as a meeting primarily aimed at Canadian ALSs.
>
>I think that for a NARALO to have a chance of 
>succeeding, there needs to be more US-based ALSs 
>in existence and participating in the RALO 
>creation process. I agree with John that their 
>should be significant progress made 
>electronically, although I believe that a 
>face-to-face meeting prior to the formal signing 
>would be a good thing. However, having the 
>definitive NARALO formation meeting with so few 
>US ALSs and only one in attendance is both premature and a recipe of failure.
>
>For the record, I could not attend the meeting due to other commitments.
>
>Alan
>
>At 02/02/2007 03:14 PM, Luc Faubert wrote:
>
>
>Nick,
>
>If I understand well, you're telling us that 
>Wendy Seltzer, John Levine and Alan Greenberg, 
>the North American ALAC reps have decided that a 
>NARALO formation meeting is not a good idea?
>
>Given that their mandate includes -- at least 
>for Wendy and John who have the NA interim seats 
>-- "assist[ing] in the formation and 
>qualification of At-Large Structures and 
>Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs)" (see 
>"Responsibilities of the Interim ALAC" at 
><http://www.icann.org/committees/alac/>http://www.icann.org/committees/alac/ 
>), I guess I'm missing something here.
>
>I would appreciate explanations from our 3 ALAC 
>reps, as I don't recall them stating their views 
>on this list. I'm sorry if I'm mistaken,
>_______________________________________________
>NA-Discuss mailing list
>NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>---
>Draft MoU with ICANN:
>http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
>
>Draft Operating Principles:
>http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070208/483c23b9/attachment.html 