[NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful communication

[Gareth Shearman]

Yes, Garth and Dharma's points are very well stated.  On the other  
hand, having just listened to a session in LA there was a good  
discussion between board members and the alac reps.

board underscored the commitment to ALAC


On Oct 30, 2007, at 10:11 AM, Garth Graham wrote:

> In general, I consider postings to lists that merely say "me too!" to
> be abusive of privilege.  I say that to underline the strength of the
> "ditto" I'd like to add to Dharma Dailey's points below.
>
> Yes, because of the importance of understanding how the issues of
> Internet Governance emerge into public policy, I'm still lurking on
> the ALAC, NARALO and IGC lists.  I do this in spite of the degree to
> which they often degenerate into "process" instant messaging systems
> to support those able to participate in the face-to-face interaction
> provided by their attendance at ICANN and IGF meetings.  But, after
> shepherding Telecommunities Canada's elevation to the higher realms
> of ALS, and thus catalysing to some degree the formation of the
> NARALO,  and after the experience of hosting an ALAC "outreach"
> meeting at TC's expense, I consciously drew back from active
> participation.  I acted, and with some success, but rated the cost as
> much too high for me to keep pushing.  I still believe there is a
> "payoff" for both ICANN and TC from TC participation.  TC is one of
> the few "open" vehicles in Canada for sharing experience of the
> impact of Internet use on community development.  It's a counter-
> balancing voice needs to be at the table.  But, personally, this kid
> isn't going to touch that hot stove more than once.
>
> I'm going to end by noting what you already know.  There is an
> enormous gap between the realities of daily life online and ICANN's
> highly technical agendas.  Correct action for an ALAC in the longer
> term, whatever that might be, is probably in the gap and not at the
> end points.
>
> GG
>
> On 29-Oct-07, at 8:20 PM, Dharma Dailey wrote:
>
>> Therefore, if there is value to
>> recruiting "people like me" into the ICANN process, the structure
>> leaves little incentive for me to be involved because 1) the
>> structure doesn't allow much lateral interaction  2) I'm not learning
>> much about how ICANN policies affect the issues I care about  3) It's
>> not fun to participate.   In short, there is no payoff.
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- 
> lists.icann.org
> Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/
> ------
>