[NA-Discuss] Bottom Up Action Procedure - Was NARALO statement on pre-registration
DThompson1 at GOV.NU.CA
Wed Aug 24 16:07:42 UTC 2011
Olivier wrote: "In my opinion, RALOs also need to work on formalizing such processes."
I find that very interesting that the regions do not have any kind of procedure on this. We need to discuss this as a group and come up with something that our region can follow so that things down fall through the cracks again.
I would think that it should go something like this: NARALO has a discussion on its mailing list and/or telephone conferences which is lead by the Chair. Once consensus is achieved, the Chair requests that the ALAC discuss the matter. Discussions and spearheading of the matter at the ALAC level should be promoted by the region's duly elected ALAC representatives. This would also imply making sure that it got its own place on the agenda. Said duly elected ALAC representatives should make sure that they are aware of the history and importance of the agenda item so that they can speak for the region on the matter.
I specifically state above "elected ALAC reps" because the NomCom rep is not under an obligation to further the views of his/her region.
Also, somehow all of the work shouldn't be piled onto one elected ALAC rep's shoulders. Somehow a division of labour must be achieved, although I'm not sure how.
I would really like to invite feedback on this matter. We, as a region, need to have a process in place for this.
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
From: Beau Brendler [mailto:beaubrendler at earthlink.net]
Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 8:09 AM
To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
Cc: Thompson, Darlene; ICANN AtLarge Staff; na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
Subject: Re: [ALAC] NARALO statement on pre-registration
Thanks for your wise statements.
Indeed we have been "winging it" process-wise, and the problem is not unique to the RALOs and ALAC. Maybe we can create a case study or something that traces an idea for action from inception at the ALS level all the way up to what the ALAC may or may not do with such an idea for action.
I figured since the NA RALO had effectively signed off on the draft in the manner I described, and passed it on to the other RALOs with positive feedback from LAC and acknowledgement from EUR (I can't believe I am typing in these gibberish acronyms), then at the bare minimum it would be in the purview of the NA leadership in ALAC to champion the idea -- whether they totally agreed with it or not. I don't look upon statements like this as meaningless, I see them as the beginnings of articulation of policy generated by the grass-roots.
Also, you wrote:
"In such bottom-up processes, I am well aware of the risk of promoting the views of a vocal minority at the expense of a silent majority - and therefore if there is any doubt that a process has matured, I'd rather kick it back to its originator to work out a plan of action together."
Indeed, I agree with you most certainly. But on the converse, there's only so many times you can kick around a draft statement, and for only so long, before people at the grassroots from where it originated start to complain that the fish is rotting. One such complaint already came my way, directed at me, for my "lack of action" on the statement in Singapore.
>From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
>Sent: Aug 23, 2011 9:26 PM
>To: Beau Brendler <beaubrendler at earthlink.net>
>Cc: "Thompson,Darlene" <DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca>, ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>, na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>Subject: Re: [ALAC] NARALO statement on pre-registration
>On 24/08/2011 01:22, Beau Brendler wrote :
>> Really? Does the NA-RALO need to have a discussion with its >elected< representatives to ALAC about what bottom-up consensus means, and about the importance of listening to your constituency?
>> Thanks for making me aware of this.
>I do not think at all that the response from NARALO's elected
>representatives is a case of not listening to their constituency. It is
>a case of NARALO reaching consensus, declaring it, bringing consensus to
>the other RALOs and having the ALAC reach consensus on this. Noting that
>I have not seen this process mature yet, I suggested that the matter
>continue on email.
>Clearly Beau, the ALAC will need to discuss processes by which such
>bottom-up action could be formalised and promoted so as to avoid the
>current tendency to let subjects hang unresolved. In my opinion, RALOs
>also need to work on formalising such processes. If we wish to be
>proactive at promoting the view of the Internet users, this will need to
>be discussed with all present in Dakar, with regional leadership as well
>as ALAC members present around the table.
>In such bottom-up processes, I am well aware of the risk of promoting
>the views of a vocal minority at the expense of a silent majority - and
>therefore if there is any doubt that a process has matured, I'd rather
>kick it back to its originator to work out a plan of action together.
>Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
More information about the NA-Discuss