[At-Large] [ALAC] Idea for an alternative to the EMM proposed in the At-Large Review

Aida Noblia aidanoblia at gmail.com
Mon Feb 13 19:17:19 UTC 2017

I share what Vanda, Seoul, Alan said.

On the contrary to current general trends, part of the teamwork that is
done tends to be replaced in part by individual work.

I share with Vanda the concern for RALOS and the appearance of these
rapporteurs who are not like representatives of the RALOS people who belong
to the community, represent it and are active in it community. The
rapporteurs may bring to the ALAC a summary of their impressions but are
not mandated by the community.

RALOS are conceived "as an information conduit and facilitators ...) who"
disseminate information from ICANN, promote the participation of its
members and channel the regional user's point of view to ICANN. "Would
RALOS (and their authorities) then come into contact (or are they or
represent) the Internet end users and not the" rapporteurs "? Or both?
Replace in part the rapporteurs on RALOS or overlap its functions? Is there
a greater separation between the community of Internet users and ALAC?

It is very difficult  in a short time such a stirring proposal, that it
changes so radically the current structure.  I think needs improvement is
the functioning, within the current structure. Do not change the
structures, which as Alan says requires a thorough and detailed work.
Besides: it is not the structure that fails, as mentioned by Seoul.

. There are many problems and many policies to think and resolve at ICANN
now to change this complex aspect and deal with its proper functioning.
There are not enough workforces for everything. It is a crucial moment.
There are problems of domains, jurisdiction, human rights ...we need all
 our time for that issues.


2017-02-13 15:32 GMT-03:00 Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>:

> If this, or any other major reorganization of At-Large is to happen, it
> will need to be with careful planning and attention to details.
> One of the major flaws of the ITEMS EMM is that it glosses over "details"
> that are in fact major issues. Two examples are just how is it that people
> will suddenly know about us and flock here and exactly how do we recognize
> and track "active" individuals.
> In this model the questions are different. Here are just a few of them:
> - Just who is it in ICANN who will establish and organize these chapters,
> and who will carry out any formalities that are needed to allow them to
> exist (such as incorporation or creating Bylaws that may be required in
> some jurisdictions)
> - How do you ensure that they do not wither following the exuberance of
> creating them (a major problem with ISOC Chapters)?
> - How do you handle disputes that may arise between different factions in
> a country?
> - How do we transition from where we are now to this new model, without
> losing the relatively few hard workers we have in each country?
> This may well be a viable model, and certainly one that could have been
> created at the start. Given the knowledge of the ISOC Chapter model, I have
> no doubt it was seriously considered. If it is going to be sold, it needs
> to be pretty bullet-proof.
> Alan
> At 13/02/2017 09:04 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh wrote:
> Here's an idea for an alternative proposal for At-Large to the EMM model
>> proposed in the At-Large Review
>> My thoughts - The proposed EMM has flaws. Some immediate ones :
>> - it destroys the community and with that, the consensus building of
>> community with replacement
>> of individuals with even less ties to the public community. Such
>> individuals will promote and collude with other individuals to keep
>> themselves in the loop. Also, with many of the policy discussions in GNSO
>> being English, this permanently eliminates persons from developing/emerging
>> economies from non-English from ever participating.
>> - given that any individual could already participate in GNSO, we would
>> be no different from such random individuals
>> - it removes the mandate on oversight and accountability on ICANN
>> activities from end user interests
>> - a thousand individuals in one large country will override 10
>> individuals from a small country  so there will be less diversity in the
>> EMM model only from those countries with large number of  individuals.
>> - Nomcom appointees to ALAC new to ICANN will serve as Liasions to other
>> groups is not sensible
>> There are many more problems but I want to focus on a IMO a better
>> At-Large model than the EMM one:
>> - ICANN establishes At-Large Chapters in each country similiar in concept
>> to Rotary or ISOC chapters.
>> - each chapter is open to anyone interested in ICANN from the interests
>> of end users.
>> - ICANN can set guidelines for each chapter - some examples: must do
>> certain level of outreach, have term limits, have a public F2F awareness
>> meeting to recruit new persons. ICANN would need to provide some funding to
>> make this happen but this would be small and the chapters can account to
>> ICANN for expenses.
>> - ICANN can provide the tools (mailing lists, conference tools) to
>> facilitate online discussions.
>> - Because there is a consistent brand - At-Large Chapter in the country,
>> marketing/promoting is
>> greatly simplified and easier to explain.
>> - Given that such chapters are virtual, it makes chapters easy to
>> establish with only a few individuals from a country without the challenges
>> of having formal organisations with bylaws and pay taxes.
>> So an At-Large chapter ends up being a virtual ALS in each country in the
>> ALAC/RALO/ALS model.
>> The RALOs will consist of the chapters from each country in the region
>> with each chapter electing two persons to coordinate the RALO work. The
>> RALO will be better positioned to better fulfil its MOUs with ICANN and the
>> RALO and ALAC would not have to bother with analysing whether an
>> organisation meets the criteria of an ALS.
>> The At-Large chapters will be better able to network with At-Large
>> chapters in other countries and build consensus on policy issues and help
>> promote and grow the At-Large Community.
>> ---
>> Dev Anand
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>> Content-Disposition: inline
>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>> 1;DM5PR03MB2714;27:OlX6aU+5ilJYGkCWBr9VC+nQMTZ5q/p8UnI3T/Mu/
>> bC4A5V8b6iXOxCxXT5WLXkkGfp+Ms3PkGdL88763uaqZMnaYlIy2fgUoJPag
>> Xmx9AMCDiOLcs80hUeDAIVCL9mk53bgDc4GNivpTix9SZwYGw==
>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Mailbox-Delivery:
>>         ex:0;auth:0;dest:I;ENG:(20160514016)(520000050)(520002050)(
>> 750028);
>> _______________________________________________
>> ALAC mailing list
>> ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac
>> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>> ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/di
>> splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
> _______________________________________________
> 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

Aida Noblia
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20170213/6e4fa4ec/attachment.html>

More information about the At-Large mailing list