[NA-Discuss] Length of At-Large Comment Periods

Tue May 31 20:50:25 UTC 2011

My two cents:

This problem is structural, and central to the way ICANN operates. The Board
and senior staff set various agendas in the most top-down of manners, and
the stakeholders must then scramble to be heard in the time allotted to the
issue. It's too hard to tell if this is deliberately designed to keep
stakeholders (especially volunteer ones) off-balance, or simply as a
convenience matter of keeping things neat and tidy at the Board level.

I can say from multiple first-hand experiences that attempts to advance user
issues that are not presently on the Board's plate (or in sync with its
timetable) are impolitely brushed aside -- deferred until never. Only the
GAC seems to have the leverage to override this rebuke, and even then its
engagement is hardly welcomed with open arms.

I am no more fan of the time-lines than anyone, and can only defend them by
saying that had these windows not been what they were, policy advice that we
believed needed to be heard ... would not be at all. The best we can ask for
is to ask for as much community participation _before_ the fact, to
participate in policy *before* the dreaded comment-reply window is invoked.

The new Future Challenges working group of ALAC is an attempt to reverse
this course, and to stop our being in panic-reaction mode all the time. Its
seed comes from Jean-Jaques Subrenat, a former ICANN Board member who is now
an ALAC representative from Europe. Jean-Jaques brings to this effort some
much-needed understanding of ICANN Board internals. Even so, based on
history this WG will encounter some present challenges as well ... but it
still needs to be done.

- Evan

On 31 May 2011 15:29, Beau Brendler <beaubrendler at earthlink.net> wrote:

> Unfortunately this is not a new problem. And it's not limited to ALAC -- I
> have seen the NCSG having to respond with similar, ridiculous turnaround
> deadlines set by the GNSO. Here as there, it's as if volunteers are expected
> to drop whatever they are doing in order to comment on ICANN business,
> whether trivial or significant.
>
> I do not know what a solution would be. Some of the more cynical among us
> might assume bureaucratic intent on the part of ICANN? Analogous in some way
> to the old attorney's trick of burying one's opponent in a blizzard of
> paperwork the night before a hearing?
>
> We should thank Danny for raising this point so dramatically. It is a
> fundamental flaw in the system.
>
> One possible way of working within it is to firmly designate subject
> experts on a broad range of topics and delegate to them, with trust, the
> duty of drafting a core response as soon as the request is made, then giving
> the community a chance to comment on it, rather than just opening it up
> broadly and hoping someone comes forward with something to say.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> >From: "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson1 at gov.nu.ca>
> >Sent: May 31, 2011 2:57 PM
> >To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>, 'Seth Greene' <
> Seth.Greene at icann.org>
> >Cc: "na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org" <
> na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Length of At-Large Comment Periods
> >
> >I think that Danny has raised an excellent point and I would like to hear
> from staff on this issue.
> >
> >D
> >
> >Darlene A. Thompson
> >Community Access Program Administrator
> >Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
> >P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
> >Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
> >Phone:  (867) 975-5631
> >Fax:  (867) 975-5610
> >E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:
> na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
> >Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2011 2:51 PM
> >To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond
> >Cc: na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >Subject: [NA-Discuss] Length of At-Large Comment Periods
> >
> >As of late, I have noticed that when a Call for Comments is issued to the
> at-large community, the time-frame for providing comments in response to the
> Call is far from sufficient.  Below I have listed the last eight Call for
> Comment cycles (announcement dates and comment closure dates are shown); the
> available time for comments can at best be described as a few days.  A few
> days is simply not enough time for most individuals, and I can't imagine
> that organizational entities would take any comfort in the present
> arrangement.  It would be appreciated if something could be done to improve
> the present situation.
> >
> >
> >1.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on the Public Call by the
> Stability, Security and Resilience of the DNS Review Team
> >
> >Announced 01 April
> >Deadline  03 April
> >
> >
> >2.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on the Proposed Framework for the
> FY12 Operating Plan and Budget
> >
> >Announced 04 April
> >Deadline  04 April
> >
> >
> >3.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on the Post-Expiration Domain Name
> Recovery Working Group Proposed Final Report
> >
> >Announced 20 April
> >Deadline  22 April
> >
> >
> >4.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement to the ICANN Board on the RAA
> Negotiations
> >
> >Announced 22 April
> >Deadline  29 April
> >
> >
> >5.  Call for Comments:  JAS WG Second Milestone Report
> >
> >Announced 08 May
> >Deadline  09 May
> >
> >
> >6.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on the Proposal for Renewal of the
> .NET Registry Agreement
> >
> >Announced 11 May
> >Deadline  15 May
> >
> >
> >7.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on Academia Representation on
> NomCom
> >
> >Announced 20 May
> >Deadline  25 May
> >
> >
> >8.  Call for Comments:  ALAC Statement on eG8 Forum
> >
> >Announced 20 May
> >Deadline  22 May
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >------
> >NA-Discuss mailing list
> >NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> >
> >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> >------
> >
> >------
> >NA-Discuss mailing list
> >NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
> >
> >Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> >------
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>

-- 
Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada
Em: evan at telly dot org
Sk: evanleibovitch
Tw: el56