[At-Large] The visa to Canada and fall of participation
petersomoragbon at gmail.com
Mon Oct 28 09:27:21 UTC 2019
Your contribution as far as I am concerned is playing the devil's advocate.
One would have expected your active involvement as a National before now.
How many African countries with poor network problems would host effective
virtual summits. And at what locations with ALS located in different parts.
Canada is defrauding visa applicants by deliberate refusals and asking they
The intelligence of their consular officers are suspect. Giving same reason
for refusal for ALL applicants! 😱
Even though a country has the right to refuse or accept visa application,
one major criteria used by all is the applicant travel history.
So anyone supporting Canada in their inglorious selective and racially
biased visa process should please have a rethink
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019, 06:47 Evan Leibovitch, <evan at telly.org> wrote:
> Hi Satish,
>> In addition to all the benefits mentioned, remote meetings will also save
>> on the enormous carbon emissions that our meetings seem to cause (as per
>> the ICANN CEO's recent blog).
> However, in a recent conversation with the CEO, we were told that ICANN
>> does not foresee any change in its meeting strategy in the short run, which
>> means we have to still seek ways to improve the visa process, especially
>> for participants from the Developing World.
> There are two issues here: At-Large Summits and ICANN meetings in general.
> It is within our capacity now to commit ATLAS IV to be virtual, which
> gives plenty of time to plan and test. (Indeed, given the massively lower
> cost and improved access, virtual Summits could be held every year.)
> Meanwhile, it is my opinion that ALAC should be advancing very strong
> Advice to the Board to hasten the virtualisation of its meetings. This is
> not only a developing-world issue, it's one with real consequences
> worldwide. The current meeting policy impairs developing-world access well
> beyond the visa issue. Visa problems are irrelevant to those who want to
> attend but can't afford to go and are not deemed worthy of subsidy; virtual
> meetings eliminate these barriers for all.
> Currently, only the financially motivated and the subsidized can attend
> ICANN meetings with regularity; under this situation the vested interests
> overwhelm the meetings, from working groups to the Public Forum to private
> invitation-only side-events which trade influence for cocktails. Making
> ICANN meetings virtual greatly reduces this unbalanced access to the ICANN
> Board, staff and policy apparatus. Not only do virtual meetings eliminate
> attendance barriers for the developing world, they also reduce the
> imbalance between he public interest and the domain industry. Imagine if
> every ALS were able to attend every ICANN meeting as easily as any
> registrar! It's no wonder that the establishment wants to maintain this
> imbalance despite claims of inclusiveness.
> The experiences witnessed in this thread suggest that ALAC may want to
> advance this issue up the CEO's priority list. How badly do we want the
> barriers removed.?
> As for short term help, ICANN Constituency Travel has been grappling with
> this issue for decades. ICANN itself can't be expected to understand local
> visa issues everywhere they have meetings, and very very few countries
> have no entry restrictions
> ICANN 68 will be in a country that denies all access to people from Israel,
> period. ICANN 67 and ICANN 70 will be held in a country that requires visas
> from almost all of Africa and Asia (*except* for Israelis, for which
> entry is visa-free) and has 27 fewer embassies than Canada. ICANN 72 will
> be in a country that might approve your visa but still turn you away at the
> point of entry after demanding to see your phone's social media posting
> And not everyone has an easy time getting into Schengen, either.
> It's unlikely that these meeting locations, already approved by the Board,
> are likely to change. So what can be done?
> What is crucial is to have a good local host for each meeting with
> governmental connections. At ICANN 42 in Toronto almost exactly seven years
> ago, the local ccTLD (CIRA) was heavily involved as host and I don't recall
> any visa problems. (Indeed that meeting was either the first or second time
> ever that an At-Large event was hosted at an ALAC member's home -- mine).
> Next week's meeting host is the dot-quebec geoTLD
> <http://rendez-vousmontreal66.quebec/> -- have they been involved at all
> in facilitating anyone's visa issues? If not that's a problem, they should
> be the ones with local knowledge, willing to provide advice or make
> So ... in the short term, demand that ICANN has a reliable local hosts for
> each meeting who will be expected to support -- and intervene on behalf of
> -- visa applications. In the medium term and beyond, ALAC needs to push for
> virtual meetings on a general principle of inclusivity.
> I was asked for solutions; these are mine. You may now resume the
> gratuitous Canada-bashing and petition-starting, while determining if those
> constitute solutions.
> - Evan
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your
> personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance
> the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can
> visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or
> configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or
> disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the At-Large