[NA-Discuss] Who Are Internet Users?

[Thompson, Darlene]

Hi Dharma,
 
I just have several thoughts.
 
ALAC and the Board are meeting while I type this.  One question we have before them is, "What outcomes do the Board wish to see from the At-Large Summit?".  What three of them hammered on was that they need to see outcomes.  Specifically, that the ALSs will become more aware and then engaged in policy matters.
 
We could do a mapping exercise such as you are mentioning but be aware that even if the ALSs all come to an agreement as to who the internet users are, this may not necessarily affect any of the other constituencies (or ICANN itself) that may come up with a completely different definition.  Having said this, I wouldn't want to take TOO much time on this topic.  It is definitely important but I wouldn't want to get too hung up on it.
 
One of the things that we have discussed is to break the ALSs up VERY shortly after the Cairo meeting into maybe 4 policy working groups so that they can see how the process goes and so that they can learn about some issues prior to Mexico.  In Mexico, these policy drafts will then be finalized.  In Mexico, there will, of course, be further policy briefings.  This will be part of the work that ALSs will be required to do in order to be funded to go to the Summit (hey, we warned everybody that work was going to be involved and filling out one questionnaire ain't it!).
 
I hope this helps,
 
D

________________________________

From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Dharma Dailey
Sent: Mon 11/3/2008 5:56 PM
To: Bret Fausett
Cc: NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Who Are Internet Users?




On Nov 3, 2008, at 3:32 PM, Bret Fausett wrote:

> On Nov 3, 2008, at 9:52 AM, Dharma Dailey wrote:
>> If we can get some clarity on "who is in the room"  before we start 
>> fighting about what is the "right" meaning of "internet user" is, 
>> that would help us move forward.
>
> I've been thinking about this from a different direction, in light 
> of the Verisign/.COM agreement a couple of years ago. You may recall 
> that the comment boards then were flooded with comments, many were 
> duplicates of standard form emails, many were from first time ICANN 
> commenters, spurred on by lobbyists and such, and it made parsing 
> the support for the relative positions difficult. It made me wonder 
> about asking people commenting on the ICANN Boards to register. 
> Registration would ask for basic contact information, like name and 
> address, and also ask people to disclose their financial interests 
> in the outcomes. Registration could be voluntary, and registration, 
> or failure to register, could go to the weight the comments should 
> be given. It's important to know who is in the room, but equally 
> important to know why they are in the room.


   I agree with your aim of greater transparency for all ICANN 
participants.   "Who" and "why" are deeply connected questions with 
many other questions nested within them.  In addition to calling out 
the rest of the ICANN world for better transparency,  as NARALO, we 
have the opportunity to define what best practices are regarding 
transparency  - at least within our own little domain- and to model 
their use.   Doing so may also help us to work more effectively 
together.

To take most advantage of the energy and excitement that builds up 
heading into a face to face meeting -- such as we will have in Mexico 
-- I was hoping that others in NARALO may be excited to try to map out 
these two issues -- "who" and "why."   If we can map out what's not 
contentious -- for example -- it's a fact that large telecoms consider 
themselves to be "internet users" vis a vis ICANN-- then we will have 
some clear background for discussing the more contentious material :  
"What is the best way for us to positively influence ICANN on behalf 
of internet users?" The more time that we use to discuss framing in 
Mexico City, the less time we will have to set priorities such as What 
are the most important issues in front of ICANN which affect net 
users?  and What is the best way to influence those issues on behalf 
of net users?  In my experience, it's very hard to get consensus on 
such topics in any other way than in person-- and we aren't going to 
have much time for those discussions when we do get together.

Should doing such mapping not be of interest to NARALO as a whole, I 
suggest that NARALO picks another task as a prelude to the Mexico 
meeting which will capitalize on people's natural inclination to 
participate more prior to a face to face meeting.   Alternative 
suggestions are welcome.

AIf these topics or means aren't of interest to NARALO as a whole, I 
am happy to work with anyone else that is interested in trying to map 
them.  For myself, I see this mapping and framing as a critical step 
in my own understanding of how the users I care about are impacted by 
ICANN.


-Dharma

>
>
>      -- Bret
>
>
>
> ------
> 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 NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> 
> ------


------
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 NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org <http://www.naralo.org/> 
------