[NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft AccountabilityFramework andConflicts of Interest Policy

Mon Apr 14 14:02:33 EDT 2008

Jacque and all,

  Than why is there a "At-large Staff" mailing list?  Just
for fun I suppose?!  Or is that "At-large Staff" mailing list
also misleading?  

  I do realize fully that the "Staff??" is  all volunteers.  
After all the ALAC still has no funding to pay for a truely 
professional staff.  Of course ICANN even with funding seems 
to have a difficult time hiring competant staff.

  I also realize fully that any user that participates 
in the ALS's is strictly voluntary as well.  And one would
hope that that remains unchanged and without constraint or
prejudice.

  And further, I certainly am not part of the ALAC staff, yet
I am able to post to the staff mailing list.  Not that I mind,
but that also is misleading in and of itself.

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam at jacquelinemorris.com>
>Sent: Apr 14, 2008 1:38 PM
>To: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>, "Thompson,Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA>, Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart at icann.org>
>Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, NA Discuss <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft AccountabilityFramework	andConflicts of	Interest Policy
>
>Hi
>My ALS has no "STAFF". It's a volunteer organisation, and we have no staff. 
>The members do the work. A lot of ALSes have no official staff. So this 
>statement, indicates to me a great misunderstanding of the groups that are 
>ALSes and the resources available to us.
>
>
>--------------------------------------------------
>From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com>
>Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 1:25 PM
>To: "Thompson,Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA>; "Nick Ashton-Hart" 
><Nick.Ashton-Hart at icann.org>
>Cc: "At-Large Worldwide" <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; "NA Discuss" 
><na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft AccountabilityFrameworkandConflictsof	Interest Policy
>
>> Darlene and all,
>>
>>  Yes it is true that some of the ALS staff are greatly
>> in need of education.  The users are not so much in such
>> great need of education.  Users should be and will be the
>> educators to ALS staff members it appears to me thus far,
>> unless particular members of the ALAC staff are so erogant
>> as to be less than excpeting of that great lack in education
>> and definate need to recieve it.
>>
>>  I shall continue to endevor to share what knowledge I
>> have, am learning, and shall continue to learn with the
>> ALAC staff, whom seems to be less than able or willing to
>> learn on thier own verition.
>>
>>  We also all should try to remember that educaton is an
>> ongoing process although some knowledge already obtained
>> by some of us whom are professionals in the IT industry,
>> such as myself have not adaquately shared what knowledge
>> they do have regarding information that has been known
>> for several if not many yesrs that has only recently
>> become factors and issues in the operation of the Internet
>> at a very basic level which has a direct effect on all
>> users.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>>>From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA>
>>>Sent: Apr 14, 2008 8:59 AM
>>>To: "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam at jacquelinemorris.com>, Evan Leibovitch 
>>><evan at telly.org>, Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart at icann.org>
>>>Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, NA Discuss 
>>><na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework 
>>>andConflicts of Interest Policy
>>>
>>>I *SO* agree with Jacqueline on this.
>>>
>>>How can we punish or even expect anything at all out of ALSs that
>>>haven't been educated.  This should be our major thrust right now if we
>>>actually want community involvement.
>>>
>>>D
>>>
>>>Darlene A. Thompson
>>>Community Access Program Administrator
>>>Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
>>>P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
>>>Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
>>>Phone:  (867) 975-5631
>>>Fax:  (867) 975-5610
>>>E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of
>>>Jacqueline A. Morris
>>>Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 4:03 PM
>>>To: Evan Leibovitch; Nick Ashton-Hart
>>>Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss
>>>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework
>>>andConflicts of Interest Policy
>>>
>>>Evan
>>>IMO top priority should be the production of the long delayed documents,
>>>
>>>brochures etc to explain issues to the public.  I have to say that I
>>>haven't
>>>read this document yet - haven't prioritised the time to do that.
>>>I'm responding to your email and other opinions I have read on the
>>>document.
>>>
>>> I do not think that we can say that an ALS is derelict in its duty if
>>>we
>>>haven't got the policy documents or statements translated in a timely
>>>manner, if we haven't got a primer written to explain the issue BEFORE
>>>we
>>>ask for comments on the policy statement. If they can't get this info
>>>out to
>>>their members, they cannot do what we ask of them.
>>>So I think that if Staff has any time at all, one excellent thing to do
>>>would be to prepare a "backgrounder" for EVERY policy item up for
>>>discussion - a simple 2 pager that indicates the basic issue, that
>>>includes
>>>a glossary, and is in the major languages. So that ppl know what the
>>>background is to the document that is sent out for comment. And then
>>>they
>>>can try to comment.
>>>And if after giving everyone the tools and supporting them over a period
>>>of
>>>time, there's no activity, then yeah we can do something about it.
>>>
>>>Jacqueline
>>>--------------------------------------------------
>>>From: "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org>
>>>Sent: Sunday, April 13, 2008 3:34 PM
>>>To: "Nick Ashton-Hart" <Nick.Ashton-Hart at icann.org>
>>>Cc: "At-Large Worldwide" <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>; "NA Discuss"
>>><na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework
>>>and
>>>Conflicts of Interest Policy
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I wish to go on record that, in my view, the request, production and
>>>> debate of this document constitutes dereliction by ALAC and ICANN
>>>staff
>>>> of their duties to the ICANN and to the public ALAC pretends to serve.
>>>>
>>>> Mostly the document is bureaucratic gobbledygook, the complexity of
>>>> which encourages its ignorance rather than its heeding. However, my
>>>> biggest problem with it -- and the ensuing discussion -- is not so
>>>much
>>>> the details of the wording so much as the disturbing and (to me)
>>>> destructive philosophy that underlies the whole document and why it
>>>> exists.
>>>>
>>>> ALAC and ICANN have barely begun to commence -- let alone fulfill --
>>>> their obligations to the public, yet they have sought to waste
>>>extremely
>>>> scarce resources (both staff and volunteers) obsessing with yet more
>>>> internal construction and hand-wringing over the obligations of the
>>>> public to them.
>>>>
>>>> The ink is barely dry on the last RALO memo of understanding, and we
>>>are
>>>> already wasting precious time how to lay blame and punish
>>>> "non-performers". Not only does this indicate a distasteful
>>>inclination
>>>> towards negative re-enforcement, but it reflects a continued
>>>> ignorance/denial -- within our own community -- of the role At-Large
>>>> serves.
>>>>
>>>> To be blunt, ICANN needs me more than I need ICANN. I do not say that
>>>> out of pure ego, since I believe that phrase applies to every ALS and
>>>to
>>>> every individual on this mailing list. We all serve here in a very
>>>> difficult role, making topics that are generally boring and
>>>> uninteresting to the public not only relevant but interesting enough
>>>to
>>>> learn about (AND respond to!). ICANN and ALAC should be falling over
>>>> themselves in figuring out how to support its public members and
>>>attract
>>>> high quality thinking; instead they obsess with rules, limits and
>>>> censure protocols. How utterly counter-productive!
>>>>
>>>> I have an extremely difficult time getting my own ALS members to
>>>> substantively understand policy in its _primary_ fields of interest
>>>> (open source, software patents, DRM etc). ICANN issues are peripheral
>>>to
>>>> our mission, as they are to the vast majority of the public -- and
>>>this
>>>> was the intention for ALSs by design. Unlike NCUC and other ICANN
>>>> constituencies, At-Large is not (intended to be) populated with policy
>>>> wonks who thrive on (and often make a career out of) advising others.
>>>> It's meant to represent the public, which by and large has to be
>>>> "encouraged" to even care about ICANN issues. In my ALS and I suspect
>>>> many others, policy opinions must be nurtured and encouraged and
>>>require
>>>> significant background information supplied in the local street
>>>language.
>>>>
>>>> It's not an easy or quick process, and it's barely begun. Yet here we
>>>> are -- having supplied the public little or none of this critical
>>>> background -- already working on how to punish those whose greatest
>>>sin
>>>> will be to have turned nothing into nothing.
>>>>
>>>> I would assume that a bureaucratic organization such as ICANN already
>>>> has policies in place for issues such as conflict of interest. That
>>>ALAC
>>>> still feels the need to re-examine and re-work these issues in its own
>>>> image appears to indicate that:
>>>> 1) it has an inflated opinion of its own level of maturity
>>>> 2) it wants to look busy, regardless of whether its actions actually
>>>> serve its mandate
>>>> 3) it still hasn't really come to terms with why it exists and who it
>>>> serves
>>>> 4) all of the above
>>>>
>>>> Given that ALAC and ICANN have given so little to support its ALSs and
>>>> their members, it's not hard to find ALSs that have given little back.
>>>> Given that ALAC needs all the help it can get, it should be spending
>>>> ZERO time on how to decrease its ranks. Even one person-hour spent by
>>>a
>>>> committee member or someone from an "underperforming" ALS is one
>>>> person-hour that ICANN would not have had otherwise.
>>>>
>>>> Of course, leadership positions bring with them additional
>>>obligations.
>>>> On these and related matters, it's amazing how much internal muck can
>>>be
>>>> handled with common sense and discretion.
>>>>
>>>> I urge ALAC members to consider the folly of continued obsession with
>>>> procedure, or any activities not geared directly to educating the
>>>public
>>>> and extracting public-centric policy from the result of that
>>>education.
>>>> Everything that does not serve this mission is a distraction from it,
>>>> and obviously ALAC is far too easily distracted.
>>>>
>>>> Personally I would like to suggest a six-month moratorium on _any_
>>>ALAC
>>>> activity regarding internal procedures, simply to see if it could
>>>> survive such a drought without entropy or implosion.
>>>>
>>>> Note: This is my personal view. It is not stated in my capacity as
>>>> NARALO chair.
>>>>
>>>> - Evan
>>>>
>>>>

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827