[At-Large] Say Whut!
6.internet at gmail.com
Tue Dec 11 11:38:34 UTC 2018
On Tue, Dec 11, 2018, 4:55 PM Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels at gmail.com
> I have been asked directly my views on the At-Large place in the ICANN
> comunity and specifically, the role of the ALAC.
> First, my strategic and operational views - what we might do and how we
> ought to do that - have not changed and are outlined in the R3 Paper
> co-authored with Evan, Jean Jacque [Subrenat] and a few others. The
> principal R3 pleading is
a more strategic ALAC role and, tacking to an operational profile similar
> to the SSAC's;
With a stature that is in no way beneath the GNSO or GAC, then there would
be a balance for the good of ICANN and the DNS.
fewer and more authoritative publications/utterings
> Second, I have always believed that the At-Large can exert more influence
> by participating in PDP WGs, that is, in the guts of the policy-setting
> process. This means more of us must step up ready to play the long game.
> Yes, some internal WGs are useful for sunshine to overarching issues and
> maybe, extracting consensus At-Large positions. I do not believe direct
> engagement in the PDP WGs are much more useful for advancing the At-Large
> agenda and identifying collaborators in other groups. This posture requires
> a lot of work for individuals but from my view, a greater At-Large's
> interaction in this space will do more to advance the At-Large agenda than
> anywhere else.
> With specific reference to the Applicant Support PDP, I served as Co-Chair
> and I know several of us, like Dev and Lance and certainly Evan included,
> were heavily invested in those outcomes. We did not get all we wanted and
> its implementation was certainly not what was anticipated. However, the
> results reinforced my thinking on the approach we must take for results to
> matter and firmed up my belief that more At-Large interests engaged could
> have engendered better outcomes.
> *Carlton A Samuels*
> *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment &
> On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 9:21 AM Carlos Raul Gutierrez <
> carlosraul at gutierrez.se> wrote:
>> It's about time. And the effort should be internal (like the GNSO's PDP
>> 2.0 strategy exercise). Instead of external reviewers and mediators....
>> On December 10, 2018 8:18:30 AM CST, Roberto Gaetano <
>> roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com> wrote:
>>> I am wondering whether this thread suggests that time at the next summit
>>> should be dedicated to rethinking the role of ALAC, its effectiveness in
>>> the Multi-Stakeholder model, its priorities, etc.
>>> On 10.12.2018, at 14:49, Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
>>> Hi Siva,
>>> 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 vitual
>>>>> meeting technologies. I would also concentrate ALAC activity in ONLY three
>>> The suggestions above sound too drastic to take sides with.
>>> I make no apologies for this proposal's radicalism. But I also recognize
>>> that proper public education, surveys and research will be expensive. ICANN
>>> will not manufacture a significantly bigger budget.
>>> But if ALAC is focused on the areas I propose, there is substantial
>>> savings to be realized in cutting back on facets of At-Large that have, at
>>> best, offered only cosmetic benefit.
>>> If DNS is demystified there would be greater user participation.
>>> Maybe. Not everyone who needs to know how the DNS works needs to be
>>> engaged in it. Nor should they. People who get the education and are
>>> interested to help will know where to find us, reducing the wasteful
>>> expenditures on "outreach".
>>> - surveys and R&D into public needs and opinions about domain names and
>>>>> the DNS
>>>> +1. A considerable amount of R&D could happen through social media,
>>>> not necessarily by votes, even by 'likes' and reactions to non-commercially
>>>> promoted posts and tweets
>>> That's not where I was headed. Proper quantitative research requires
>>> effort and expertise. I would never trust social media for this, at least
>>> as a primary source.
>>> - 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)
>>>> Needs to go even beyond that. ALAC could become more emphatic on Cross
>>>> Community PDPs.
>>> That's way too into the details. I expect that if we engage in real
>>> research, the areas of global public concern will not lie where you may
>>> believe they are. What is of great interest inside the domain bubble is of
>>> little interest to the world outside that bubble, and vice versa.
>>> Doing this properly, I expect, will dramatically change ALAC's policy
>>> - Evan
>>> At-Large mailing list
>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>> At-Large mailing list
>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the At-Large