[NA-Discuss] If ICANN is not the answer, what was not the question?

Wed Jul 18 06:23:36 EDT 2007

I agree

Randy Glass
A at L

On 7/16/07, Dharma Dailey <dharma at ethoswireless.com> wrote:
>
>
> Thanks for you thoughtful responses.   The big question for me is not
> what can we do with ALAC or ICANN but how can we get more
> communication for more people.  We haven't got our ducks in a row.
> Until we determine what is useful to do  energy will fritter away and
> nothing much will happen.
>
> I've got one foot in the door of ICANN and the other out.   I'm
> waiting to see what value there is in participating in this arena.
> Yes maybe we can add value to ICANN's policy development process, but
> will putting time-energy into that yield more than putting energy
> into other areas?   Think .us, for example.
>
>
> Even in terms of what's useful to do within ICANN, it seems that
> there is very little consensus.   It would be good to get on the same
> page.     It doesn't mean we all have to act in lock step, but
> wouldn't it be nice to at least understand where others are coming
> from, what they see as the priorities, and what they are willing to
> work on?
>
> The only item of consensus I see is that there seems to be universal
> distaste for the current structure.   The reason everyone is sweating
> the small stuff, in my opinion, is because ICANN is not clear what
> our purpose is and neither are we.  One side or the other has to
> square that up.
>
> .  I prefer to consider what we want to accomplish, *then* what we
> need to make it happen, rather than the other way around.  I would
> prefer to see NA RALO say to ICANN, "This is what we are going to do,
> this is what we want to do it," than be in the position of having
> ICANN set the parameters for us of what we are able to do.
> Especially since those parameters seem so fluid.   What Vittorio says
> regarding ICANN responding to the pressure of outside actors is a
> lesson for us here.   If you want to influence ICANN policy, a voting
> seat on the board may not be as effective as outside action.
>
> -Dharma
>
>
>
> On Jul 14, 2007, at 7:33 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>
> > Hello Vittorio,
> >
> >> Just a technical note - all ICANN structures are subject to review
> >> every three years (for example, the GNSO was reviewed last year, and
> >> this year, in parallel to the ALAC review, the Nomcom is being
> >> reviewed, and the Board will be up for review soon). This was
> >> foreseen
> >> in the Bylaws as a way to facilitate continue evolution of the
> >> structures, and prevent ossification.
> > Yes, but ALAC has only been in full operation (ie, all RALOs operating
> > and sending elected representatives) for two weeks. This is not a
> > three-year review, this is a six-month review at best.
> >
> > Having said that, I am not altogether upset with the timing given
> > what I
> > have seen with the current operation of ALAC ;-).
> >
> >> I'm quite sure that we wouldn't even have got the significant
> >> increase
> >> in funding, attention and importance that we've had in the last
> >> two or
> >> three years, if the hard work and credibility of the people in the
> >> ALAC hadn't been complemented by a some external factors, and
> >> particularly by the attempted "competition" by the ITU and by other
> >> United Nations processes that challenged the role of ICANN, forcing
> >> ICANN to increase its commitment to the public interest and to
> >> broader
> >> accountability, to rank better on the international scene.
> >
> > There are people on this list (you know who you are) who have
> > experienced ICANN at its opaque worst, who believe that the whole ALAC
> > process is a publicity stunt to appease the pressures you mention
> > above.
> > I certainly realize, as I mentioned before, many parts of ICANN wish
> > that At-Large is "seen but not heard". That is, in their perfect world
> > they benefit from the appearance of a public process without actually
> > needing to listen to it.
> >
> > While I have often taken issue with the cynicism and defeatism in the
> > way such issues have expressed on this list, the core of their
> > argument
> > has not been lost by us newcomers. (I certainly hope that was the
> > impression Wendy took away from San Juan). Our challenge is to exploit
> > the external pressures and whatever good intentions actually exist, so
> > that ICANN cannot  just throw money at us but otherwise ignore what we
> > have to say.
> >
> > The first step, of course, is having something of value to say. ALAC's
> > obsessing over issues such as "how to appoint the chair" or how
> > much to
> > restrict ALS requirements are impediments and distractions from the
> > most
> > important work. Even our own debates on "enfranchising the individual
> > participant" have taken on this characteristic, even though most
> > people
> > here are sympathetic. My greatest fear is that ALAC will get too
> > comfortable with its existing level of influence obsessing with
> > internal
> > matters but producing little of its real mandate. Doing so will render
> > it to no more than an agent of those who want to keep us silent. Busy
> > and well funded, to be sure, but silent nonetheless.
> >
> > Somehow I am quite confident that we will not allow that silence to
> > happen. :-)
> >
> > - Evan
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
> >
> > Draft Code of Conduct:
> > http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> Draft Code of Conduct:
> http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
>


-- 
-------------------------
AmericaAtLarge.org
RJPacific.com
DDMF.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20070718/6a31abcd/attachment-0001.html