[NA-Discuss] Seeking Regional Advice for a New ALS

Louis Houle louis.houle at oricom.ca
Sat Feb 20 22:00:54 UTC 2016

+1 Evan

And I would like to share one more consideration : since the inception 
of NARALO, I noticed that motivation, engagement and participation of 
the ALs has evolved. It's normal to see newcomers and to loose some 
participants. What one expects is oppeness and inclusiveness, not deep 
diving procedures or a timetable for a the new ALs to justify their 

My 2 cents,

Louis Houle
ISOC Quebec

Le 2016-02-13 19:29, Evan Leibovitch a écrit :
> On 13 February 2016 at 21:57, Judith Hellerstein 
> <judith at jhellerstein.com <mailto:judith at jhellerstein.com>>wrote:
>     So going forward we want to make sure that the ALS we accept will
>     be an active member.
>>> ​Sorry, but going forward such investigation is a complete waste of time
> ​ and doomed to failure​
> .
> By virtue of its application, the organization has indicated interest 
> and answered the questions asked. Beyond that you can't read their 
> minds or anticipate changes in leadership in the future that may shift 
> more or less attention away from ICANN issues.
> Everyone would naturally like active ALSs to help share the workload, but
> ​you should resist ​
> anything beyond:
>     "Here are our minimum criteria for ALSs. Of course we would love
>     for you to contribute more, but we require at least [....]. Are
>     you able to commit to this?"
> That's a yes/no question, to be answered to the best abilities of 
> current leadership. Anything beyond that is unacceptable level of 
> prying. Remember, one of the main points behind getting ALSs involved 
> (as opposed to, say, members of NCUC) is that we are encouraging orgs 
> that don't necessarily have Internet governance as a primary focus. So 
> we should be applauding their very interest, regardless of whether or 
> not they will be actively involved.
> The issue of keeping a current contact list is a challenge for any 
> organization, frankly I think that's the role of staff rather than 
> volunteers. It can be easily automated, and the scale of doing it 
> globally for all regions makes the available tools quite cost 
> effective. ICANN depends so much on volunteers that I'm stunned it 
> doesn't have an organization-wide set of tools for this.
>     ISOC-DC is just the first ALS on this new procedure.  Nothing
>     having to do with them, just that they are the first one where we
>     are taking a deeper dive in.
> ​Please stop such "deep dives". This practice will not help, and it 
> has immense capacity to undo the good of outreach being done.
> ​The ability to participate in ICANN is not such a prize that we have 
> the luxury to be so demanding of newcomers. For ALSs, the demands are 
> many and the rewards few -- we need them more than they need us.​ I 
> remind that any group in the world can submit public comment directly 
> to ICANN, they don't need us as a conduit. There needs to be a special 
> reason why to participate through At-Large, and communicating this 
> reason is the role of outreach. You don't want to undo that through 
> needlessly invasive entry procedures.
> ​The amount of time that At-Large expends examining itself -- compared 
> to the amount of time spent actually affecting ICANN -- has always 
> been a source of astonishment to me. As it continues to be.
>> - Evan
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------

-------------- section suivante --------------
Une pi�ce jointe HTML a �t� nettoy�e...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss/attachments/20160220/fb885850/attachment.html>

More information about the NA-Discuss mailing list