[At-Large] Weekly posting summary for at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
jjs at dyalog.net
Tue Jan 20 09:26:34 UTC 2015
Thank you Alan for taking this up.
Speaking as a former member of the ALAC, I am making a request for information and guidance, not a "complaint".
My questions were in my previous email, copied below.
----- Mail original -----
De: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
À: "Jean-Jacques Subrenat" <jjs at dyalog.net>
Cc: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Envoyé: Mardi 20 Janvier 2015 00:54:29
Objet: Re: [At-Large] Weekly posting summary for at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
I do not have the time for a detailed reply, but the stats have been generated for many years with the agreement of the ALAC, and no one has ever complained before. If an ALAC member would like to raise the question, we will consider if it should be maintained.
At 19/01/2015 06:21 AM, Subrenat, Jean-Jacques wrote:
Thanks Jefsey for your
I read all the messages on this thread (and chuckled on the sarcastic
ones) but none answered my initial questions:
- Was there a decision to task any particular individual/firm with
carrying out this statistical/nominative
tracking? Was this decision taken in ALAC or elsewhere (date,
- Was this submitted to regular review and approval, or is there a
separate decision to grant this as a permanent authorization (date,
- If this is being used as a metrics tool, what is its qualitative
relevance? Has it been effectively used to "measure" the value
of this or that member, say in ALAC? How were the criteria determined,
and by whom (date, reference)?
Remaining silent on these questions would not, in my mind, serve the
"polycratic rights" of the "cyberagora system". You
are no doubt familiar with the novel by Dave Eggers, "The
Circle" (Penguin Books, 2013).
More information about the At-Large