[At-Large] Comments to today's call
mmoll at ca.inter.net
Wed Jul 27 13:34:31 UTC 2022
Thanks Roberto, for putting that great question re: waivers on the
table. How about adding it to the questions we might pose to the board
during ICANN75. Something like: ICANN has made it clear that meetings
pose more risks to the organization post-pandemic. But the risks to
volunteers attending those meetings have also increased. For some
attendees, employers assume the risk. Others continue to shoulder the
risks personally. This widens the already wide gap between two types of
representation and participation in ICANN's multistakeholder model. Is
there any plan in place to better share these risks between .org and
volunteers in a way that does not negatively affect motivation.
Bit clumsy wording -- but you get the idea.
On 2022-07-26 1:35 p.m., Roberto Gaetano via At-Large wrote:
> Dear all,
> I was putting some comments in the chat but I thought it was better to
> summarise my thoughts in an email.
> About the ALAC Chair elections, first of all warm congratulations to
> JZ and many thanks to Maureen for the great job done.
> Although I am perfectly happy with the choice, I believe that
> Sébastien has a point in addressing a timing issue related to the
> NomCom decision. The problem that I have is just formal, at it is that
> the outgoing ALAC has elected the incoming Chair. Again, to be clear,
> this is not an issue of substance or contents, just the form.
> I would suggest two things:
> * first, that we, as ICANN community, have a more careful look at
> the schedule - if the AGM is two months earlier than usual, all
> activities, including NomCom processes, have to be adjusted
> * second, that as soon as the new ALAC is seated in KL they formally
> approve by acclamation the new ALAC Chair - this will address any
> formal issues that could be raised in the future.
> I have spoken enough about the waiver, so just a comment on what Léon
> and Marita have been saying. I agree with Léon, the waiver has always
> been there, but as far as I can remember it has never used a language
> that raised eyebrows to the (few) people who have actually read it.
> So, what made us all more aware of it, was the additional clauses
> added after the pandemic - so Marita is not wrong either noting that
> the problem comes after the pandemic.
> My personal opinion is that the pandemic has made things more
> difficult to everybody and has increased the risk of consequences. I
> acknowledge the great job in organising a hybrid meeting under the
> circumstances - I spoke to Nick Tomasso in Den Haag, and appreciate
> the challenges - no question about. The point is that, if we have a
> higher risk, how is this risk shared between icann.org
> <http://icann.org> and the volunteers? The way this risk is shared
> affects the motivation of the volunteers, as has been also observed
> during the meeting, while it has only a marginal effect on other
> participants who might have their employers assuming the consequences
> of the risk. And this widens the gap, already wide enough, between the
> two types of representation and participation. This is why it has to
> be addressed.
> 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