[At-Large] Say Whut!

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ocl at gih.com
Tue Dec 11 00:37:07 UTC 2018


Dear John,

I do not agree with your assessment that the ALS are somewhat of joke:
whilst some might well be a joke, others are quite active on many
points, so please let's not generalise. That said, I am urging again
RALOs to clean up any ineffective, inactive ALSes and this is happening
in several regions, with this potential decrease possibly replaced by a
rise in the number of individual members, which is already happening.

On your point regarding a survey, why don't you all work it out in the
ALAC Sub-Committee on Outreach and Engagement?
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+and+Engagement

That's where the work takes place.

Kindest regards,

Olivier

On 10/12/2018 18:42, John More via At-Large wrote:
> Evan
>
> I agree with your direction. The ALS are somewhat of a joke.  Mostly
> just vehicles for individual involvement (not itself bad).  Part of
> their being somewhat of a “joke" is that most of what put forth for
> comment is of a technical character that is best worked on by those
> with the specific background needed.
>
> A good measure of the ALS problem is the amount of energy that is
> devoted to trying to make certain that ALSs (=their representatives
> and “members?”) are minimally engaged.
>
> There would be a benefit for an internal review of whether the ALAC
> can fulfill its bylaw purposes with its current structure and
> activities (as opposed to the broader ones you suggest). 
>
> Could start with a survey, as suggested by Christian.  DO NOT HIRE
> outside experts and consultants — major waste of money ALWAYS. More
> than enough talented and thoughtful people in the ALAC world.
>
> John More
>
>> On Dec 10, 2018, at 7:28 AM, Evan Leibovitch
>> <evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Christian,
>>
>> Given my experiences and observations... While I have totally stayed
>> away from the last At-Large review, I did one myself as a personal
>> mental exercise. 
>>
>> The conclusion I came to is that the current structure underneath
>> ALAC is overly politicized, appeals to superficial airs of
>> importance, and is at its core designed to be utterly impotent in
>> regard to serving its bylaw mandate.
>>
>> Were I to be engaged in a real exercise to enable ALAC to serve its
>> bylaw mandate, I would wish to eliminate ALSs and move to fully
>> individual membership in RALOs. I would reduce travel and invest more
>> in virtual meeting technologies. I would also concentrate ALAC
>> activity in ONLY three areas:
>>
>> - Creation and distribution of plain language public education on the
>> DNS and how it affects public use of the internet (written
>> independently of ICANN itself) 
>>
>> - surveys and R&D into public needs and opinions about domain names
>> and the DNS
>>
>> - analysis of the result of such research, and development of ICANN
>> input based on that (both in original policy initiatives and response
>> to existing activity) 
>>
>> Any takers? I'm happy to engage if any interest exists. My rationale
>> behind this is quite deep and I'm happy to expand if interest exists. 
>> ___________________
>> Evan Leibovitch, Toronto
>> @evanleibovitch/@el56
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 11:45 AM Christian de Larrinaga
>> <cdel at firsthand.net <mailto:cdel at firsthand.net> wrote:
>>
>>     Given the clarity of these two comments. Maybe it is time to
>>     consider a
>>     straw poll over what future role and activity At Large
>>     participants feel
>>     is viable? Given the experience of the continuous perilous
>>     undermining
>>     of the Internet edge by every digital miner with a pickaxe, shovel or
>>     stick of dynamite?
>>
>>     Christian
>>
>>
>>
>>     Carlton Samuels wrote:
>>     > Yessir, I can recall your exact words to me so long ago; waste of
>>     > time, decision already made. The reasoning you offered was
>>     bold, too.
>>     >
>>     > I was interested at one point. Then when it was too clearly a
>>     bridge
>>     > too far, I retired to the shadows.
>>     >
>>     > A congressman from Texas once told a writer I truly loved that in
>>     > politics you have no right to call yourself a politician if you
>>     cant
>>     > drink their whiskey, take their women and money and still vote
>>     against
>>     > them. Theres a lesson there somewhere.
>>     >
>>     > The arguments you hear on this or that are stimulating for a policy
>>     > wonk. But quite frankly at this point much of what the At-Large
>>     does
>>     > is margin-gathering.
>>     >
>>     > Someone has to. And we live in hope.
>>     >
>>     > -Carlton
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > On Mon, 10 Dec 2018, 1:07 am Evan Leibovitch
>>     <evanleibovitch at gmail.com <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
>>     > <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:evanleibovitch at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >     So... Do all of you who sank your valuable time into that
>>     >     where-do-the-auction-funds-go sham of a process feel a little
>>     >     betrayed now?
>>     >
>>     >     How many more times will we continue to play this futile game?
>>     >
>>     >     The fix is always in. Let the "community" thrash about with
>>     >     well-meaning but big-picture-pointless debate, then swoop in at
>>     >     the end to remind where the ultimate decision lies. It lies
>>     with
>>     >     the money.
>>     >
>>     >     "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
>>     >
>>     >     I got fooled enough with the Applicant Support process, the CCT
>>     >     and a few others. Yeah, it's more than one but at least I
>>     can say
>>     >     I know the experience intimately. But the aftermath of these
>>     >     efforts (or lack thereof) is why you don't see me wasting
>>     my time
>>     >     on subsequent ones. (Cue the theme music from "CSI:Miami".)
>>     >
>>     >     Countless of my colleagues continue the good-faith attempt to
>>     >     disprove Einstein's definition of insanity(*),
>>     unsuccessfully. I
>>     >     love my ALAC friends (I've literally invited you to my
>>     home) and
>>     >     it pains me to watch the story repeat so often.
>>     >
>>     >     But sooner or later the collective massochism and denial has to
>>     >     end. Turnover in ALAC is low enough to have plenty of veterans
>>     >     around who should know better.
>>     >
>>     >     Stop playing the game. Challenge the rules instead. Perfect
>>     >     example: why is ALAC involved in the minutiae of "subsequent
>>     >     procedures" for new rounds of gTLDs without having even
>>     challenged
>>     >     the rationale for new rounds at all? Also, I've previously
>>     spoken
>>     >     at length about ALAC's sad longtime choice to respond to the
>>     >     agendas of others rather than even try to set its own.
>>     >
>>     >     Monied interests overpower us politically by orders of
>>     magnitude,
>>     >     and without a regulatory role ICANN has no incentive to push
>>     >     against the money. This needs to be changed, or others will
>>     change
>>     >     it from the outside.
>>     >
>>     >     I remind that we are now living through a period of time in
>>     which
>>     >     awful political choices are being made, all over the world, in
>>     >     desperate moves to disrupt deaf and corrupt status quo.
>>     ICANN and
>>     >     ALAC ignore this trend at their danger.
>>     >
>>     >     ___________________
>>     >     Evan Leibovitch, Toronto
>>     >     @evanleibovitch/@el56
>>     >
>>     >     (*) that may not have ever actually been said by Einstein, but
>>     >     it's a useful phrase regardless of source.
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >
>>     >     On Dec 9, 2018 12:34 AM, "Carlton Samuels"
>>     >     <carlton.samuels at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>
>>     <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:carlton.samuels at gmail.com>>> wrote:
>>     >
>>     >         https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/12/07/dot_web_review/
>>     >
>>     >
>>     > _______________________________________________
>>     > At-Large mailing list
>>     > At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>     <mailto:At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>>     > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>     >
>>     > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>>     <http://atlarge.icann.org/>
>>
>>     -- 
>>     Christian de Larrinaga
>>     @ FirstHand
>>     -------------------------
>>     +44 7989 386778
>>     cdel at firsthand.net <mailto:cdel at firsthand.net>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> <mailto:At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/at-large/attachments/20181211/ed3282e8/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the At-Large mailing list