[At-Large] [ALAC] ELECTION CALL for ALAC Officers to serve from 22 October 2012 to ICANN AGM 2013

Carlos Vera Quintana cveraq at gmail.com
Tue Sep 18 17:29:24 UTC 2012

This is a very relative and complex situation. 1 or 2 years seems to be a short period for those working on a position but CAN BE a very large period for those looking for having an opportunity to work. So are double periods!! It's also relative because volunteering needs some recognition and being able to fill some directive positions is the kind of recognition thats isfair for any volunteer... but here and there are people that ALWAYS are experiencing directive positions and go from body to body inside an institution and from institution to institution even SIMULTANEOUSLY because of their great experience and job but also because some time they were allowed to fill directive positions and this is the nice thing in a civil society effort....isn't?

 This is not an enterprise representation and almost everybody is looking to be able to learn more having the right opportunity sometime during their volunteer live. When volunteers have gained enough experience comes one of two things: the opportunity to serve in a directive position or some new generation leadership that does put you on retirement.

Rules have to be not only mandatory but fair rules. I guess that from hundred or even thousands of volunteers working everyday very hard maybe some dozens have been able to participate and grow with their volunteering and hard work. Also several professionals goes from volunteer to directives to staff of some corporation or institution and then is an inner circle of same excellent people And professionals but dozen not thousands.

This can not be compared AT ALL with enterprises because they do not make a volunteer work they are paid professionals that receive an amount of money to serve their enterprises interest and not to represent civil society and community interest.

So as you can see it's not rotation for rotation but  refreshment and opportunity for the whole community  

I have a dream and is civil society equal opportunity to grow, to rule, to be recognized. From my personal experience is amazing how people can rule something even with no experience  if they are given the right opportunity and advice.

Civil Society is not only a group of experts... is more than that... OF COURSE!! and what normal citizen needs is support for the several complex issues that icann or internet governance demand... (I work on several citizen councils ruled by citizens and advised by experts).... If not let's reduce civil society to a small group of "experts with experience" and forget about the essence of civil society or simply hire professionals experts that rules this thing also, as enterprises do.

Carlos Vera
Enviado desde mi iPhone

El 18/09/2012, a las 11:38, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> escribió:

> On 18 September 2012 09:57, Carlos Vera Quintana <cveraq at gmail.com> wrote:
>> +1 this is a very reasonable position. We have to have rotation and new
>> faces all the time in all positions.
> As someone standing for re-election, I have an obvious bias in the
> discussion. However, even were I not, I would be intrigued -- and a little
> unsettled -- by the concept of "change for the sake of change".
> There are term limits for many positions within At-Large leadership -- I am
> in my last of two terms as ALAC member -- and I am curious to know the
> rationale behind "new faces all the time" in a manner that exceeds both the
> intent and the practice of these reasonable limits.
> This is now my sixth year within ICANN as a volunteer and I am only now
> finding a comfort level with the many layers and complexities of working
> within ICANN's policy development. That may just mean that I'm slow, but I
> would suggest that ICANN possesses a level of internal complexity rivalling
> that of a UN or government bureacuracy. It takes time just to learn.
> Insisting on rapid rotation -- for the sake of rapid rotation -- ensures
> that ALAC leadership will never have the depth necessary to deal with
> issues that matter to Internet end-users. Our adversaries -- those who
> dispense with the public interest because of financial gain -- have no such
> limits. Indeed there are many within the domain industry who have been
> involved with ICANN since its inception and are acutely aware of its inner
> workings and how to manipulate them for gain. Given our reasonable levels
> of term limits our people will never achieve the level of personal
> entrenchment enjoyed by industry, but I would suggest that the rapid
> rotation suggested by some here would be absolutely devastating to the
> ability of ICANN At-Large to assert itself in the corridors of power.
> If there are issues with the performance of individuals running for
> re-election, general complaints about leadership or direction, or the
> ascendency of people advocating fresh priorities or changes of strategy, by
> all means let's bring them forward and engage in useful debate and an
> informed election. I welcome such engagement. But I know that there are a
> number of issues that I personally am involved with and consider
> "unfinished business" -- unfinished because they just take so long to
> process through ICANN. The others running for re-election have their own
> priorities in this regard. I think it would be a shame -- and damaging to
> the At-Large cause -- if many of these efforts are forced to pause while
> being rebooted or re-learned simply because of an election based on theory
> that looks good on paper but works poorly in the negotiations room.
> Two years from now, because of term limits, I know for certain that I will
> be off not only the executive but my ALAC position. I will welcome my
> replacement. I fully understand and appreciate the need to share the load
> and encourage new voices, both as a matter of outreach and keeping At-Large
> constantly in touch. But I suggest that there is a balance to be struck
> between continuity and refreshment, and that the balance currently in place
> within ALAC is a good one. Going more narrowly than term limits to assert
> change for its own sake does a disservice to incumbents and all of At-Large.
> In most organizations of which I'm aware -- whether corporation, government
> or NPO -- frequent changes of leadership does not indicate stability or
> success.
> - Evan
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org

More information about the At-Large mailing list