November 2015 - ALAC - lists.icann.org

Re: [ALAC] ALAC Working Methods - Was: Endorsements: Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 27, 2015

Nov. 27, 2015

At 26/11/2015 09:29 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: >Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos. >On 27 Nov 2015 00:12, "Alan Greenberg" ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: > > > > I now think I understand the issue here, and > it is indeed an issue of how the ALAC works. > > >SO: I am glad to read this part ;-) > ><snip> Thanks for explaining the process. > >. So if only 1 or 2 ALAC members disagree with > something, we can still claim to have > consensus. with 3/15 (20%), it is right on the > line and I would probably not declare a > consensus is in that case. In the case at hand, > one person disagreed. That should not be > ignored (and I did explain why I disagreed), > and no one else supported your position. > > >SO: Yes correct and that is absolutely >understandable by me as it's similar to how we >observe consensus within AfriNIC (where I serve >as Co-Chair). The difference is that Chair >always come back to declare the outcome so we can move to next item > > > >So I felt that there was a strong (but not >unanimous) consensus to proceed with the plan. > > > >SO: This is where the confusion came for me as >it was not possible to know what the Chair felt >remotely(at times it's not physically ;-) ). I >was being careful not to act on what has not >been declared by the Chair ( AFRALO leadership >on this list, would confirm that we were making >plans at AFRALO level but just waiting for the >declaration from Chair). So I guess going >forward, it should be clear on how many number >of days (or hours) one should wait for any >opposing view before assuming consensus (even if >the Chair did not formerly declare it) > > > Hopefully this particular case, and our general methodology is now clear. > > > >SO: Yes indeed, and hopefully the motivation for >me abstaining when we voted is also now >understood. Now that we are clear, I do like to >formerly update my abstain to a +1 (if it's possible) > >Regards > > Alan > > > > > > At 24/11/2015 03:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: > > > >> Hello Alan, > >> > >> Just for the record, here is the follow-up > mail I sent to the list and I also sent you a > private follow-up message when I did not hear > from you Alan (both of which did not receive a response). > >> > >> There was discussion on item 1 of what you > said you required and there was no indication > on whether item 2 and 3 was in effect so I > wrote requesting confirmation of that. This > could also be an issue with me getting used to > how ALAC operates but perhaps your response would have helped. > >> > >> For the record, AFRALO would have organised > her nominations just that we(I) thought there > was still discussion on item 1 and that item 2 and 3 was pending. > >> > >> Regards > >> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 > >> Kindly excuse brevity and typos. > >> On 18 Nov 2015 13:01, "Seun Ojedeji" > <<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com > wrote: > >> > >> Hello Alan, > >> > >> Can you confirm if your proposal for 1 > nomination each at ALAC and RALO level > respectively is now in effect? so regions can > organise. Will be good to know the deadline for the nomination. > >> > >> Regards > >> > >> Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 > >> Kindly excuse brevity and typos. > >> On 18 Nov 2015 00:59, "Alan Greenberg" > <<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca > wrote: > >> There is no formal rule against endorsing > candidates who did not identify ALAC in the > application. However, I see little merit in > evaluating all 72 applications, and for the > reasons that Cheryl, outlines, I do not think > it proper for us to unilaterally "adopt" a candidate. > >> > >> If you know of someone who you think we > should consider, please let me know and I will contact them privately. > >> > >> Alan > >> > >> At 17/11/2015 12:50 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: > >> That is a good idea, but I would prefer to > do this endorsement and then establish the > rules associated with the group's ongoing task. > There is not enough time to do that properly > and have it formally sanctioned by the ALAC and > then get this endorsement carried out. > >> > >> Regarding selection of candidates who did > not identify ALAC of a target group. Good question. I will look into it. > >> > >> Alan > >> > >> At 17/11/2015 02:39 AM, SÃÂ©bastien Bachollet wrote: > >> Thanks Alan for putting the proposal together, > >> I support your proposal. > >> It is important that we embarque in this choice both ALAC and the Ralos. > >> > >> However, can we have this group set-up for one year and to be in charge of > >> all the endorsements during that year? > >> > >> One question: Can we support people even if they didnÃÂ¹t ask for ALAC > >> endorsement? > >> > >> All the best > >> > >> > >> Skills are useful but diversity is essential. > >> > >> SÃÂ©bastien Bachollet > >> +33 6 07 66 89 33 > >> Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/>http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ > >> Mail: SÃÂ©bastien Bachollet > <<mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>sebastien(a)bachollet.com > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> Le 17/11/2015 03:12, ÃÂ« Alan Greenberg ÃÂ» > >> < > <mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > on behalf of > >> <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca > a ÃÂ©crit : > >> > >> >In Dublin I suggested that the ALT recommend who to endorse for the > >> >Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team and there > >> >was a strong feeling within the ALAC that this responsibility not be > >> >given to the ALT. The applicants have now been announced and we need > >> >to decide who to endorse > >> >- > <https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications>https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications. > >> > > >> >I suggest that we use the same composition for the selection team as > >> >we have for a number of other recent groups, for each region, one > >> >ALAC Member selected by the Members from that region, and one person > >> >selected by the RALO leadership. No one who has submitted an > >> >application is eligible to serve of the endorsement group. All team > >> >members will need to: > >> > > >> >- Be familiar with the purpose of the Review > >> >( > <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e > > >> >n). > >> >- Review the Applications. > >> >- Prepare a brief evaluation of each candidate (details to be provided). > >> > > >> >Endorsements are due no later than 14 December. > >> > > >> >Nine people indicated that they were seeking ALAC endorsements, five > >> >seeking only an ALAC endorsement, and four list multiple alternatives. > >> > > >> >I am happy to have the ALAC delegate the endorsements to this group, > >> >and if the ALAC agrees, there will be no need for the ALAC to ratify > >> >the endorsements. > >> > > >> >We will be scheduling the first (and possibly only) meeting of the > >> >group for the week on November 30th, so please submit names within > >> >the next week to ensure that we can select a suitable time for the > >> >meeting. > >> > > >> >To be clear, I am looking for: > >> > > >> >1. Any objections to having the group make the endorsements without > >> >further ALAC action. > >> > > >> >2. The name of the ALAC member from each region to participate in the > >> >endorsement process. > >> > > >> >3. The name of the regional appointee from each region to participate > >> >in the endorsement process. > >> > > >> >Alan > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >_______________________________________________ > >> >ALAC mailing list > >> > <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >> > > >> >At-Large Online: > <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >> >ALAC Working Wiki: > >> > > <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A > > >> >LAC) > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ALAC mailing list > >> <mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >> > >> At-Large Online: > <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >> ALAC Working Wiki: > <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… >

1 0

ALAC Working Methods - Was: Endorsements: Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 27, 2015

Nov. 27, 2015

I now think I understand the issue here, and it is indeed an issue of how the ALAC works. In Dublin, there was a discussion of how to endorse the candidates, and I, in this original e-mail, laid out that path, saying the how the endorsement group would be composed, suggesting that it be delegated the responsibility to formally endorse without reverting to the ALAC, and asking ALAC Members and RALO leadership to identify the people. You (Seun) disagreed with the delegation part. I explained by I thought that this was not needed but said we would see what other people thought, and you suggested that instead we use the entire ALAC to do the endorsement. No one else commented on either your original objection or your new suggestion. The ALAC, to the extent possible, works by consensus. That applies not only to formal suggestions, but to discussions in general. Consensus is not formally "defined", but our Rules of Procedure say "12.1.3.1 As a rule of thumb, Consensus is no less than 80% of the sitting ALAC Members". So if only 1 or 2 ALAC members disagree with something, we can still claim to have consensus. with 3/15 (20%), it is right on the line and I would probably not declare a consensus is in that case. In the case at hand, one person disagreed. That should not be ignored (and I did explain why I disagreed), and no one else supported your position. So I felt that there was a strong (but not unanimous) consensus to proceed with the plan. Hopefully this particular case, and our general methodology is now clear. Alan At 24/11/2015 03:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: >Hello Alan, > >Just for the record, here is the follow-up mail >I sent to the list and I also sent you a private >follow-up message when I did not hear from you >Alan (both of which did not receive a response). > >There was discussion on item 1 of what you said >you required and there was no indication on >whether item 2 and 3 was in effect so I wrote >requesting confirmation of that. This could also >be an issue with me getting used to how ALAC >operates but perhaps your response would have helped. > >For the record, AFRALO would have organised her >nominations just that we(I) thought there was >still discussion on item 1 and that item 2 and 3 was pending. > >Regards >Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos. >On 18 Nov 2015 13:01, "Seun Ojedeji" ><<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >Hello Alan, > >Can you confirm if your proposal for 1 >nomination each at ALAC and RALO level >respectively is now in effect? so regions can >organise. Will be good to know the deadline for the nomination. > >Regards > >Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos. >On 18 Nov 2015 00:59, "Alan Greenberg" ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >There is no formal rule against endorsing >candidates who did not identify ALAC in the >application. However, I see little merit in >evaluating all 72 applications, and for the >reasons that Cheryl, outlines, I do not think it >proper for us to unilaterally "adopt" a candidate. > >If you know of someone who you think we should >consider, please let me know and I will contact them privately. > >Alan > >At 17/11/2015 12:50 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >That is a good idea, but I would prefer to do >this endorsement and then establish the rules >associated with the group's ongoing task. There >is not enough time to do that properly and have >it formally sanctioned by the ALAC and then get this endorsement carried out. > >Regarding selection of candidates who did not >identify ALAC of a target group. Good question. I will look into it. > >Alan > >At 17/11/2015 02:39 AM, SÃ©bastien Bachollet wrote: >Thanks Alan for putting the proposal together, >I support your proposal. >It is important that we embarque in this choice both ALAC and the Ralos. > >However, can we have this group set-up for one year and to be in charge of >all the endorsements during that year? > >One question: Can we support people even if they didnÂ¹t ask for ALAC >endorsement? > >All the best > > >Skills are useful but diversity is essential. > >SÃ©bastien Bachollet ><tel:%2B33%206%2007%2066%2089%2033>+33 6 07 66 89 33 >Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/>http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ >Mail: SÃ©bastien Bachollet ><<mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>sebastien(a)bachollet.com> > > > > >Le 17/11/2015 03:12, Â« Alan Greenberg Â» ><<mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >on behalf of ><mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> a Ã©crit : > > >In Dublin I suggested that the ALT recommend who to endorse for the > >Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team and there > >was a strong feeling within the ALAC that this responsibility not be > >given to the ALT. The applicants have now been announced and we need > >to decide who to endorse > >-<https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/c > ct/applications>https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications. > > > >I suggest that we use the same composition for the selection team as > >we have for a number of other recent groups, for each region, one > >ALAC Member selected by the Members from that region, and one person > >selected by the RALO leadership. No one who has submitted an > >application is eligible to serve of the endorsement group. All team > >members will need to: > > > >- Be familiar with the purpose of the Review > >(<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-vo > lunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e > >n). > >- Review the Applications. > >- Prepare a brief evaluation of each candidate (details to be provided). > > > >Endorsements are due no later than 14 December. > > > >Nine people indicated that they were seeking ALAC endorsements, five > >seeking only an ALAC endorsement, and four list multiple alternatives. > > > >I am happy to have the ALAC delegate the endorsements to this group, > >and if the ALAC agrees, there will be no need for the ALAC to ratify > >the endorsements. > > > >We will be scheduling the first (and possibly only) meeting of the > >group for the week on November 30th, so please submit names within > >the next week to ensure that we can select a suitable time for the > >meeting. > > > >To be clear, I am looking for: > > > >1. Any objections to having the group make the endorsements without > >further ALAC action. > > > >2. The name of the ALAC member from each region to participate in the > >endorsement process. > > > >3. The name of the regional appointee from each region to participate > >in the endorsement process. > > > >Alan > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >ALAC Working Wiki: > ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At > -Large+Advisory+Committee+(A>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A > >LAC) > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

2 1

Happy Thanksgiving!
by Vanda Scartezini Nov. 24, 2015

Nov. 24, 2015

Dear friends To all Thanksgiving is a revenant occasion, let me wish a peaceful time, full of joy with whole family and friends you love. To all others, lets use the opportunity to thank for the opportunity to work together and contribute for a better world. Lots of kisses to all. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos.

4 3

Re: [ALAC] ACTION: Endorsements: Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 24, 2015

Nov. 24, 2015

Yes, I did mean to answer, but cannot recall what happened. I do apologize. I welcome your suggestions on how I could have made the original e-mail clearer. Alan At 24/11/2015 03:59 PM, Seun Ojedeji wrote: >Hello Alan, > >Just for the record, here is the follow-up mail >I sent to the list and I also sent you a private >follow-up message when I did not hear from you >Alan (both of which did not receive a response). > >There was discussion on item 1 of what you said >you required and there was no indication on >whether item 2 and 3 was in effect so I wrote >requesting confirmation of that. This could also >be an issue with me getting used to how ALAC >operates but perhaps your response would have helped. > >For the record, AFRALO would have organised her >nominations just that we(I) thought there was >still discussion on item 1 and that item 2 and 3 was pending. > >Regards >Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos. >On 18 Nov 2015 13:01, "Seun Ojedeji" ><<mailto:seun.ojedeji@gmail.com>seun.ojedeji(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >Hello Alan, > >Can you confirm if your proposal for 1 >nomination each at ALAC and RALO level >respectively is now in effect? so regions can >organise. Will be good to know the deadline for the nomination. > >Regards > >Sent from my Asus Zenfone2 >Kindly excuse brevity and typos. >On 18 Nov 2015 00:59, "Alan Greenberg" ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >There is no formal rule against endorsing >candidates who did not identify ALAC in the >application. However, I see little merit in >evaluating all 72 applications, and for the >reasons that Cheryl, outlines, I do not think it >proper for us to unilaterally "adopt" a candidate. > >If you know of someone who you think we should >consider, please let me know and I will contact them privately. > >Alan > >At 17/11/2015 12:50 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >That is a good idea, but I would prefer to do >this endorsement and then establish the rules >associated with the group's ongoing task. There >is not enough time to do that properly and have >it formally sanctioned by the ALAC and then get this endorsement carried out. > >Regarding selection of candidates who did not >identify ALAC of a target group. Good question. I will look into it. > >Alan > >At 17/11/2015 02:39 AM, SÃ©bastien Bachollet wrote: >Thanks Alan for putting the proposal together, >I support your proposal. >It is important that we embarque in this choice both ALAC and the Ralos. > >However, can we have this group set-up for one year and to be in charge of >all the endorsements during that year? > >One question: Can we support people even if they didnÂ¹t ask for ALAC >endorsement? > >All the best > > >Skills are useful but diversity is essential. > >SÃ©bastien Bachollet ><tel:%2B33%206%2007%2066%2089%2033>+33 6 07 66 89 33 >Blog: <http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/>http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ >Mail: SÃ©bastien Bachollet ><<mailto:sebastien@bachollet.com>sebastien(a)bachollet.com> > > > > >Le 17/11/2015 03:12, Â« Alan Greenberg Â» ><<mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org>alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >on behalf of ><mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> a Ã©crit : > > >In Dublin I suggested that the ALT recommend who to endorse for the > >Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team and there > >was a strong feeling within the ALAC that this responsibility not be > >given to the ALT. The applicants have now been announced and we need > >to decide who to endorse > >-<https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/c > ct/applications>https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications. > > > >I suggest that we use the same composition for the selection team as > >we have for a number of other recent groups, for each region, one > >ALAC Member selected by the Members from that region, and one person > >selected by the RALO leadership. No one who has submitted an > >application is eligible to serve of the endorsement group. All team > >members will need to: > > > >- Be familiar with the purpose of the Review > >(<https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-vo > lunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e>https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e > >n). > >- Review the Applications. > >- Prepare a brief evaluation of each candidate (details to be provided). > > > >Endorsements are due no later than 14 December. > > > >Nine people indicated that they were seeking ALAC endorsements, five > >seeking only an ALAC endorsement, and four list multiple alternatives. > > > >I am happy to have the ALAC delegate the endorsements to this group, > >and if the ALAC agrees, there will be no need for the ALAC to ratify > >the endorsements. > > > >We will be scheduling the first (and possibly only) meeting of the > >group for the week on November 30th, so please submit names within > >the next week to ensure that we can select a suitable time for the > >meeting. > > > >To be clear, I am looking for: > > > >1. Any objections to having the group make the endorsements without > >further ALAC action. > > > >2. The name of the ALAC member from each region to participate in the > >endorsement process. > > > >3. The name of the regional appointee from each region to participate > >in the endorsement process. > > > >Alan > > > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ALAC mailing list > ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > > > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org > >ALAC Working Wiki: > ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At > -Large+Advisory+Committee+(A>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A > >LAC) > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac > >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…

1 0

Re: [ALAC] ACTION: Endorsements: Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 24, 2015

Nov. 24, 2015

There is no formal rule against endorsing candidates who did not identify ALAC in the application. However, I see little merit in evaluating all 72 applications, and for the reasons that Cheryl, outlines, I do not think it proper for us to unilaterally "adopt" a candidate. If you know of someone who you think we should consider, please let me know and I will contact them privately. Alan At 17/11/2015 12:50 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >That is a good idea, but I would prefer to do >this endorsement and then establish the rules >associated with the group's ongoing task. There >is not enough time to do that properly and have >it formally sanctioned by the ALAC and then get this endorsement carried out. > >Regarding selection of candidates who did not >identify ALAC of a target group. Good question. I will look into it. > >Alan > >At 17/11/2015 02:39 AM, Sébastien Bachollet wrote: >>Thanks Alan for putting the proposal together, >>I support your proposal. >>It is important that we embarque in this choice both ALAC and the Ralos. >> >>However, can we have this group set-up for one year and to be in charge of >>all the endorsements during that year? >> >>One question: Can we support people even if they didn¹t ask for ALAC >>endorsement? >> >>All the best >> >> >>Skills are useful but diversity is essential. >> >>Sébastien Bachollet >>+33 6 07 66 89 33 >>Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ >>Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien(a)bachollet.com> >> >> >> >> >>Le 17/11/2015 03:12, « Alan Greenberg » >><alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of >>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> a écrit : >> >> >In Dublin I suggested that the ALT recommend who to endorse for the >> >Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice Review Team and there >> >was a strong feeling within the ALAC that this responsibility not be >> >given to the ALT. The applicants have now been announced and we need >> >to decide who to endorse >> >-https://www.icann.org/resources/reviews/aoc/cct/applications. >> > >> >I suggest that we use the same composition for the selection team as >> >we have for a number of other recent groups, for each region, one >> >ALAC Member selected by the Members from that region, and one person >> >selected by the RALO leadership. No one who has submitted an >> >application is eligible to serve of the endorsement group. All team >> >members will need to: >> > >> >- Be familiar with the purpose of the Review >> >(https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/call-volunteers-cct-rt-2015-10-01-e >> >n). >> >- Review the Applications. >> >- Prepare a brief evaluation of each candidate (details to be provided). >> > >> >Endorsements are due no later than 14 December. >> > >> >Nine people indicated that they were seeking ALAC endorsements, five >> >seeking only an ALAC endorsement, and four list multiple alternatives. >> > >> >I am happy to have the ALAC delegate the endorsements to this group, >> >and if the ALAC agrees, there will be no need for the ALAC to ratify >> >the endorsements. >> > >> >We will be scheduling the first (and possibly only) meeting of the >> >group for the week on November 30th, so please submit names within >> >the next week to ensure that we can select a suitable time for the >> >meeting. >> > >> >To be clear, I am looking for: >> > >> >1. Any objections to having the group make the endorsements without >> >further ALAC action. >> > >> >2. The name of the ALAC member from each region to participate in the >> >endorsement process. >> > >> >3. The name of the regional appointee from each region to participate >> >in the endorsement process. >> > >> >Alan >> > >> > >> > >> >_______________________________________________ >> >ALAC mailing list >> >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac >> > >> >At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >> >ALAC Working Wiki: >> >https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(A >> >LAC)

2 2

Letter re NARALO/Grogan discussion in Dublin
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 24, 2015

Nov. 24, 2015

As many of you are aware, Allen Grogan, ICANN's Chief Contract Compliance Officer participated in the NARALO meeting at ICANN 54. Some of his answers were deemed less than satisfactory, and Garth is recommending that we send a letter to ICANN as a result. I concur. If you wish to review the actual interaction, you can listen to it at http://audio.icann.org/meetings/dublin2015/naralo-19oct15-en.mp3, minutes 7:45 - 17:40. You can find Garth's draft letter and both my redline and clean revision attached to Item 7 of the ALAC Agenda at https://community.icann.org/x/3rZYAw. Aside from formatting and minor stylistic changes, the more substantive changes are: - I have tried to reduce the more confrontational or personal aspects. As an example, I have removed asking Grogan to restate the goals of compliance, I have asked for ICANN to clarify its position. - removal of statement that consumer trust in general was a major focus of the Affirmation of Commitments. Consumer trust is a focus, but specifically from the point of view of the New gTLD program and how the growth in the TLD name space will impact consumers. There is one more general reference in the introduction, but it is hard to say that this is a major focus. - removal of the reverence to consumer trust being a major focus of the IANA transition. In my mind, other than the fact that consumer trust presumes the DNS stays working, it is not an issue and was not mentioned during the CWG deliberations. For the CCWG-Accountability, it is an issue only in that the AoC is being moved into the Bylaws, and the AoC words need to be faithfully carried over (and I have pointed out one place where that was not done properly). But as with Whois, consumer trust itself has not been a discussion item at all. In the latter two cases, inclusion of the items, I think, weakens the letter as the points would be harder to defend. I really want to make this letter bullet-proof so it cannot be ignored on a technicality or judgement-call. The ALT has already reviewed the revised draft and supports it. My aim is to approve the revised letter, or a variation of it during the ALAC meeting on Tuesday. If you have any comments, please send them to the list prior to the meeting, if possible. Alan

3 2

Fwd: Re: [council] GNSO Council Chair 2015 -2016 election results
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond Nov. 24, 2015

Nov. 24, 2015

FYI -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [council] GNSO Council Chair 2015 -2016 election results Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:07:09 +0100 From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> To: James M. Bladel <jbladel(a)godaddy.com>, GNSO Council List (council(a)gnso.icann.org) <council(a)gnso.icann.org> CC: Glen de Saint Géry <Glen(a)icann.org> Dear James, in my capacity as ALAC Liaison to the GNSO Council, I would like to extend the ALAC's congratulations on your appointment as GNSO Council Chair. Having worked in various capacities with your predecessors, I am well aware of the size of responsibility and workload in such a position, and wish you and your Vice Chairs Heather Forrest and Donna Austin the best for a successful year. Best regards, Olivier On 24/11/2015 01:13, James M. Bladel wrote: > Colleagues - > > Please accept my sincere thanks for your support, along with my > acknowledgment of the responsibility and expectations that come along > with this role. I'd also like to add my thanks to David and Volker > for stepping in as Co-Chairs, and to Heather and Donna for stepping up > as our newly elected Vice Chairs. > > Ahead of us are 11 months of teleconferences, 3 face to face meetings, > and a mountain of work. I’m excited about what we will accomplish > together this year, and look forward to working with everyone on > Council and Staff. > > Thank you, > > J. > > > > From: <owner-council(a)gnso.icann.org> on behalf of Glen de Saint Géry > <Glen(a)icann.org <mailto:Glen@icann.org>> > Date: Monday, November 23, 2015 at 17:57 > To: GNSO Council List <council(a)gnso.icann.org > <mailto:council@gnso.icann.org>> > Subject: [council] GNSO Council Chair 2015 -2016 election results > > Dear Councillors, > > > > It gives me great pleasure to announce that James Bladel is the new > GNSO Council Chair 2015 -2016. > > James Bladel received the unanimous support from both the Contracted > Party House and the Non-Contracted Party House. > > Electronic ballot voting started on Friday, 20 November 2015 and ended > on Monday, 23 November 2015 at 23:59 UTC. > > The results from the voting system are attached. > > Thank you. > Kind regards > > Glen > > > > Glen de Saint Géry > Supporting Organisations Advisory Committees Manager > *glen(a)icann.org <mailto:glen@icann.org>* > *http://www.icann.org* > > >

2 1

Re: [ALAC] Letter re NARALO/Grogan discussion in Dublin
by Alan Greenberg Nov. 23, 2015

Nov. 23, 2015

Thanks for catching those. As usual, your proof-reading is superb! I have fixed them! Alan At 22/11/2015 06:39 PM, Eduardo Diaz wrote: >Agree with letter (even though I am not ALAC at the moment). There >are a couple of formatting issues with the letter: the subject and >the section #3. > >-ed > >On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 6:51 PM Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >As many of you are aware, Allen Grogan, ICANN's Chief Contract >Compliance Officer participated in the NARALO meeting at ICANN 54. >Some of his answers were deemed less than satisfactory, and Garth is >recommending that we send a letter to ICANN as a result. I concur. >If you wish to review the actual interaction, you can listen to it at ><http://audio.icann.org/meetings/dublin2015/naralo-19oct15-en.mp3>http://audio.icann.org/meetings/dublin2015/naralo-19oct15-en.mp3, > >minutes 7:45 - 17:40. >You can find Garth's draft letter and both my redline and clean >revision attached to Item 7 of the ALAC Agenda at ><https://community.icann.org/x/3rZYAw>https://community.icann.org/x/3rZYAw. >Aside from formatting and minor stylistic changes, the more >substantive changes are: >- I have tried to reduce the more confrontational or personal >aspects. As an example, I have removed asking Grogan to restate the >goals of compliance, I have asked for ICANN to clarify its position. >- removal of statement that consumer trust in general was a major >focus of the Affirmation of Commitments. Consumer trust is a focus, >but specifically from the point of view of the New gTLD program and >how the growth in the TLD name space will impact consumers. There is >one more general reference in the introduction, but it is hard to say >that this is a major focus. >- removal of the reverence to consumer trust being a major focus of >the IANA transition. In my mind, other than the fact that consumer >trust presumes the DNS stays working, it is not an issue and was not >mentioned during the CWG deliberations. For the CCWG-Accountability, >it is an issue only in that the AoC is being moved into the Bylaws, >and the AoC words need to be faithfully carried over (and I have >pointed out one place where that was not done properly). But as with >Whois, consumer trust itself has not been a discussion item at all. >In the latter two cases, inclusion of the items, I think, weakens the >letter as the points would be harder to defend. I really want to make >this letter bullet-proof so it cannot be ignored on a technicality or >judgement-call. >The ALT has already reviewed the revised draft and supports it. >My aim is to approve the revised letter, or a variation of it during >the ALAC meeting on Tuesday. If you have any comments, please send >them to the list prior to the meeting, if possible. >Alan >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list ><mailto:ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org>ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac >At-Large Online: <http://www.atlarge.icann.org>http://www.atlarge.icann.org >ALAC Working Wiki: ><https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL…>https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(AL… >

1 0

Draft Statement
by León Felipe Sánchez Ambía Nov. 20, 2015

Nov. 20, 2015

Dear all, attached you will find a first draft statement on the Preliminary Issue Report on a Policy Development Process to Review All Rights Protection Mechanisms in All Generic Top-Level Domains for your review and comments. You can find the wiki space for this public comment on https://community.icann.org/display/alacpolicydev/Preliminary+Issue+Report+… Comments on this preliminary report will close on November 30 so I apologize in advance for the very short time to comment on this first draft. I suggest we leave comments open until Monday so I can review them and have a second draft prepared by Tuesday and if no further comments are needed then we could vote on it for approval. I hope you find this draft useful and that you can enrich it with your comments. Best regards, León

1 0

Fwd: Additional information on USG Transition costs published
by León Felipe Sánchez Ambía Nov. 19, 2015

Nov. 19, 2015

FYI Best regards, León > Inicio del mensaje reenviado: > > De: "Xavier J. Calvez" <xavier.calvez(a)icann.org> > Fecha: 19 de noviembre de 2015, 10:29:29 a.m. GMT-6 > Para: "community-finance(a)icann.org" <community-finance(a)icann.org>, Policy Staff <policy-staff(a)icann.org>, Lise Fuhr <lise.fuhr(a)difo.dk>, Mathieu Weill <mathieu.weill(a)afnic.fr>, Jonathan Robinson <jrobinson(a)afilias.info>, 'León Felipe Sánchez Ambía' <leonfelipe(a)sanchez.mx>, 'Thomas Rickert' <thomas(a)rickert.net> > Cc: ICANN News Alert <communications(a)icann.org>, Theresa Swinehart <theresa.swinehart(a)icann.org>, Alice Jansen <alice.jansen(a)icann.org>, "Grace Abuhamad" <grace.abuhamad(a)icann.org>, BFC <fin-comm(a)icann.org>, "Taryn S. Presley" <taryn.presley(a)icann.org>, Becky Nash <becky.nash(a)icann.org>, Susanna Bennett <susanna.bennett(a)icann.org> > Asunto: Additional information on USG Transition costs published > > Dear all, > > Please find below the link to the existing USG Transition expenses page on ICANN.org, that we have updated with additional detailed information on the Professional Services expenses incurred on project until 30 September 2015. Notably, we provide a breakdown of the expenses by type of activity (engagement, lobbying, language services,…), also indicating the names of the vendors. > > https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs-2015-1… <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/iana-stewardship-project-costs-2015-1…> > > During the Dublin meeting, we presented updates on the USG Transition costs and questions were asked to request further detail on the professional services expenses. This additional information published addresses these requests and increases further as a result our transparency on this project. > > In addition, further information and disclosure of lobbying activities at ICANN has been provided, to address more fully questions raised during the public forums in Buenos Aires and Dublin. See the link to the announcement below: > https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-11-19-en <https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2015-11-19-en> > > Glen, Lars, > Please be sure to forward this email to Stephanie Perrin, who had asked a question on the professional services expenses during the GNSO session on Sunday 19 October (copy me please). > > Thank you to those community members who, through their questions and requests, take part in improving every day ICANN’s transparency, and accountability as a result. > Feel free to forward this email broadly. > Best, > > > Xavier > > > Xavier Calvez > > CFO > > ICANN > > 12025 Waterfront Drive, Suite 300 > > Los Angeles, CA 90094 > > > Office: +1 (310) 301-5838 > > Fax: +1 (310) 957-2348 > > Cell: +1 (805) 312-0052 > >

1 0