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

Louis Houle louis.houle at oricom.ca
Tue Apr 29 19:56:18 EDT 2008


Bonjour Jacqueline,

Even NARALO has some language barrier...(-;) Quebec is the French 
heritage where the North American adventure all began. By the way, 
Québec City is celebrating its 400 anniversary this year.
http://monquebec2008.sympatico.msn.ca/MonQuebec2008/

Louis Houle
Président
ISOC Québec

Jacqueline A. Morris a écrit :
> Well Danny
> I'm unaware of any RALOs that have been in existence more than 6 years. The 
> oldest has been in existence for 18 months or so, and has not been able to 
> participate meaningfully yet as LAC isn't English speaking, and the 
> information given to us is almost all in English, so pretty much there's 
> little that can happen there.  NARALO is more active, as it doesn't have the 
> language barrier, and doesn't have to wait for documents to be translated, 
> like LACRALO, & AFRI-RALO.
>  If you check the ALS listing, most haven't been involved for more than 2 
> years either. So, we obviously aren't the people to whom you are directing 
> this.
>
> I also venture  that people who write blogs on ICANN  subjects are not 
> broadly representative of the General Public. So reading those blogs 
> probably won't fulfill the mandate to get the public involved.
>
> How long have the working groups been formed? Has any information been 
> posted in Spanish or Portuguese so that LAC volunteers can join in? 
> Personally, I'd be loathe to join a working group that is discussing a 
> series of technical documents in a language that I can't read! What would be 
> the point of that? Probably would be a giant waste of time for all involved.
> So, if the documents are translated in time for me to read them and the 
> system is set up so that I can respond in my own language and have my 
> opinions taken into consideration, it would be far more likely that I would 
> join a WG.  OF course, the WG would also have to be on a topic that was 
> affecting me or people I knew in my region. Or maybe even something I might 
> be interested in from a pure intellectual curiosity standpoint. But it would 
> have to gain my interest somehow before I'd join.
>
> I think you are definitely confusing the NCUC academic research people with 
> the general public. Academics whose work is in the field of Internet 
> Governance are far more likely to do research in the area, duh. Consumer 
> organizations are also  likely to do so, and there's a lot of outreach in 
> the at Large towards those. The taxi driver who has a facebook page, or my 
> aunt with her yahoo email are less likely to participate in meaningful 
> research, except as directed by others.
>
>
> Jacqueline
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger at yahoo.com>
> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 12:39 PM
> To: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA>; "Jacqueline A. Morris" 
> <jam at jacquelinemorris.com>; "Evan Leibovitch" <evan at telly.org>; "Nick 
> Ashton-Hart" <Nick.Ashton-Hart at icann.org>
> Cc: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework 
> andConflicts of Interest Policy
>
>   
>> If all that ICANN wants is "public opinion", they
>> could easily be reading the relevant news articles and
>> blogs that express the public's sentiment -- they
>> certainly don't need to be spending hundreds of
>> thousands of dollars to bring organizational
>> representatives into their midst on a periodic basis
>> just to accomplish that goal -- they could (for a lot
>> less money) hire a group like Pew to conduct the
>> necessary surveys and polls.
>>
>> But opinion alone is not what ICANN is after.
>>
>> They want real solutions to real problems... that
>> means that they are expecting an Advisory Committee to
>> engage in research, to declare their findings based
>> upon the research, and to arrive at recommendations
>> based upon the findings.
>>
>> As this hasn't been happening and as there is no
>> likelihood that this will ever happen (just look at
>> all the empty Working Groups), the ALAC has no
>> continuing purpose.
>>
>> Organizations with no continuing purpose (like the
>> former Protocol Supporting Organization) that drain
>> ICANN's financial resources should most certainly be
>> discontinued.
>>
>> Those few ALSs that want to continue their involvement
>> could readily migrate to the NCUC where research does
>> happen, where findings are noted, and where policy
>> recommendations do emerge.
>>
>> It's time to call an end to this six-year long failed
>> experiment.  The PSO was discontinued after two years,
>> the GNSO General Assembly was discontinued as a
>> representative unit after four years -- you've had
>> more than ample time to prove the worth of the
>> ALAC/RALO model, and the model has failed to get the
>> job done.
>>
>> I see no ongoing value in pouring more money down this
>> rathole.
>>
>>
>> --- "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA> wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Danny,
>>>
>>> Actually, I would have to agree with your statement,
>>> "The truth of the
>>> matter is that most ALSs have only a passing
>>> interest on an occasional
>>> topic; they have no deep commitment to defend those
>>> that they
>>> purportedly represent."  This goes right to the
>>> heart of what Jacqueline
>>> was saying.  ALSs are not registrants.  ICANN wants
>>> public opinion on
>>> stuff that the public, over all, has only a passing
>>> interest in.
>>>
>>> So, how do we get more public interest in this (and
>>> I DON'T mean
>>> registrant interest - I mean John Q Public)?  What
>>> are your suggestions
>>> on how to improve things, rather than just pointing
>>> out where everybody
>>> else is failing?
>>>
>>> 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: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 11:30 AM
>>> To: Thompson, Darlene; Jacqueline A. Morris; Evan
>>> Leibovitch; Nick
>>> Ashton-Hart
>>> Cc: NA Discuss
>>> Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft
>>> Accountability Framework
>>> andConflicts of Interest Policy
>>>
>>> Darlene,
>>>
>>> The Summit Questionnaire was just finalized and the
>>> 15
>>> areas of interest cited all relate to information
>>> that
>>> can readily be found through ICANN's homepage.
>>>
>>> Sufficient information is out there already for
>>> those
>>> that care about DNS issues.
>>>
>>> The answer is not to be found in creating a DNS for
>>> Dummies series in which 2 brief pages cover each
>>> issue
>>> -- if that approach is taken then all you will wind
>>> up
>>> with is something as useless as the "Guide to the
>>> DNS
>>> for End Users" that was prepared by an ICANN
>>> consultant.
>>>
>>> Show me one relevant area that an ALS cares about
>>> for
>>> which sufficient information is lacking.
>>>
>>> Information is out there for those that wish to seek
>>> it out.  You seek to explain ALS non-performance,
>>> non-involvement, and non-engagement on the basis of
>>> a
>>> lack of educational materials.  I don't buy the
>>> argument.
>>>
>>> The truth of the matter is that most ALSs have only
>>> a
>>> passing interest on an occasional topic; they have
>>> no
>>> deep commitment to defend those that they
>>> purportedly
>>> represent.
>>>
>>> Consider the IPC that aggressively acts to protect
>>> the
>>> interests of the intellectual property crowd.  By
>>> contrast, the bulk of the ALSs have no interest in
>>> protecting us -- and that is not something that a
>>> Reader's Digest condensed version of an issue will
>>> cure.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --- "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson at GOV.NU.CA> wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> Well, OF COURSE the registrant community (in the
>>>>         
>>> US,
>>>       
>>>> anyways) responded
>>>> to the RegisterFly debacle - it hurt their
>>>>         
>>> interests
>>>       
>>>> personally.  If
>>>> something affects me personally, I read up on it
>>>>         
>>> and
>>>       
>>>> respond, as well.
>>>> If it doesn't I might not.
>>>>
>>>> ALSs are generally non-profit organizations run by
>>>> people putting in
>>>> hugely long numbers of hours dealing with their
>>>> work.  They don't sit
>>>> behind a desk and have huge amounts of time to go
>>>> finding stuff and
>>>> working on stuff that doesn't affect them (or
>>>>         
>>> their
>>>       
>>>> jobs) directly.  You
>>>> must have tons more time at work to read this
>>>>         
>>> stuff
>>>       
>>>> than the entire ALS
>>>> community put together.  We all have jobs that
>>>> actually take up huge
>>>> portions of our time/life.
>>>>
>>>> When the Canadian ALSs signed up, we were told
>>>>         
>>> that
>>>       
>>>> easier to digest
>>>> information would be soon coming out.  As Nick has
>>>> reported there have
>>>> been various impediments to this but that it
>>>>         
>>> should
>>>       
>>>> "soon" be coming.
>>>> Once this is available, then I would suggest that
>>>> the NARALO do, maybe,
>>>> a weekly informational e-mailing on one subject to
>>>> all ALSs - both for
>>>> their info and for their web sites.
>>>>
>>>> In stating, "The problem isn't that ALSs aren't
>>>> being properly educated;
>>>> the problem is that ALSs are not the at-large.
>>>>         
>>> The
>>>       
>>>> real At-Large cares,
>>>> reacts and responds; they don't."  That is really
>>>> wrong.  The At-Large
>>>> does care - about those issues that affect them.
>>>> Comparing them to a
>>>> registrant that has just had the plug pulled on
>>>> their web site is
>>>> completely misleading.
>>>>
>>>> So, what issues do ALSs care about?  WELL - that's
>>>> the information we
>>>> need to get out to them.  What is happening that
>>>> they should care about?
>>>> What response is needed?  Put out information such
>>>> as that, and we will
>>>> get more input.
>>>>
>>>> Constant negativity sure won't help, though.
>>>>
>>>> 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: Danny Younger
>>>>         
>>> [mailto:dannyyounger at yahoo.com]
>>>       
>>>> Sent: Monday, April 14, 2008 10:32 AM
>>>> To: Thompson, Darlene; Jacqueline A. Morris; Evan
>>>> Leibovitch; Nick
>>>> Ashton-Hart
>>>> Cc: NA Discuss
>>>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft
>>>> Accountability Framework
>>>> andConflicts of Interest Policy
>>>>
>>>> Re:  "How can we punish or even expect anything at
>>>> all
>>>> out of ALSs that haven't been educated?"
>>>>
>>>> When these organizations signed up they agreed to
>>>> (1) distribute information on ICANN activities and
>>>> issues,
>>>> (2) enable discussions among their members on the
>>>> issues; and
>>>> (3) involve their members in relevant ICANN policy
>>>> development, discussions and decisions.
>>>>
>>>> The ICANN website currently contains information
>>>>         
>>> on:
>>>
>>>       
>> === message truncated ===
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________________________________
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now. 
>> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>>
>>     
>
>
> ------
> 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/
> ------
>
>   




More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list