- ALAC - lists.icann.org

Agenda for ICANN Board meeting - Thursday 26 June 2014 in London
by Alan Greenberg June 15, 2014

June 15, 2014

Note the main agenda item 1 - ATRT2 Alan =============== From: https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/agenda-2014-06-26-en Agenda | ICANN Regular Board Meeting 26 Jun 2014 Consent Agenda * Approval of Minutes * Redelegation of the .GW domain, representing Guinea-Bissau * Root Server System Advisory Committee New Appointees * Investment Policy Update * ICANN 52 Public Meeting Venue * Report of Multi-stakeholder Meeting Strategy Working Group (MSWG) * NGPC Membership * Thank you to Community Members * Thank you to Sponsors of ICANN 50 Meeting * Thank you to Interpreters, Staff, Event and Hotel Teams of ICANN 50 Meeting Main Agenda * Second Accountability and Transparency Review Team (ATRT2) Recommendations * AOB Published on 13 June 2014

1 0

ICANN blog: Sharing a Plan for Public Comment Improvements
by Dev Anand Teelucksingh June 14, 2014

June 14, 2014

The 40 day minimum comment period and the standardised schedule for opening public comments are good improvements. Not so sure about the reply comment phase. Dev Anand "The immediate improvements to be implemented after the London meeting include: The reply comment phase of public comment forums will be eliminated. Data evaluation and community feedback confirm that this experiment inspired by the ATRT1 recommendations has not been effective. Staff will establish a standardized schedule for the opening of future public comment periods at regular intervals. We intend to open public comment periods on an established monthly schedule - likely two times a month (e.g., first Monday and third Monday of every month). It is hoped that this will enable the various ICANN communities and their members to better organize their work. Expectations will be established and enforced among ICANN staff to ensure prompt creation of post-public comment period summary reports. Compliance with these new processes will be rigorously managed and metrics recorded. A process for community complaints about summary report content and mechanisms for corrections will be instituted. ICANN will return to a minimum comment period format. For the next six months (after the new processes are implemented) the default minimum comment period will be 40 days." Read https://www.icann.org/news/blog/sharing-a-plan-for-public-comment-improveme… for the full text.

4 4

Fwd: GAC-GNSO CG Briefing Note ..
by Alan Greenberg June 9, 2014

June 9, 2014

Pre-London Briefing Note of the group looking at improving GNSO-GAC cooperation. Alan >From: Manal Ismail [mailto:manal@tra.gov.eg] >Sent: 09 June 2014 05:42 >To: Board GAC Recommendation Implementation Working Group >Cc: Bill Graham; heather.dryden(a)ic.gc.ca; Jonathan Robinson >Subject: GAC-GNSO CG Briefing Note .. > >Dear All .. > >Please find attached a Briefing Note on the work of the GAC-GNSO >Consultation Group on GAC Early Engagement in GNSO PDP (ATRT1 Rec. >12 & ATRT2 Rec. 10.2) .. The consultation group is co-chaired by >Jonathan Robinson, GNSO Council Chair, cc'd above, and myself .. > >The note is intended to summarize the consultation group's work, >report on the status quo and set the scene for the GAC-GNSO >discussion in London, scheduled for Sun Jun. 22nd, 15:00-16:00, at >the GAC room .. > >Hope you find this Briefing Note useful .. > >Kind Regards >--Manal > >Manal Ismail >Egypt GAC Representative

1 0

Fwd: Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG) Final Report
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond June 7, 2014

June 7, 2014

FYI - please be so kind to find the final report of the Expert Working Group (EWG) on gTLD Directory Services. As explained in the message below, this working group has explored the next-generation Registration Directory Service (RDS) as an alternative to today's WHOIS. Through the publication of this final report, I would like to thank Carlton Samuels, Chair of our WHOIS WG (now folded in the Registration Issues WG), for his extensive work in this area. The result is a significant milestone in the future of Registration Directory Services! If you are interested in the topics raised in this report, please contact staff(a)atlarge.icann.org to get added to the At-Large Registration Issues WG. Kind regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG) Final Report Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 10:36:22 -0700 From: Denise Michel <denise.michel(a)icann.org> To: Jonathan Robinson, GNSO Council <jonathan.robinson(a)ipracon.com>, GNSO groups <liaison6c(a)gnso.icann.org>, Olivier Crepin Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com>, Patrik Faltstrom, SSAC Chair <paf(a)frobbit.se>, heather.dryden(a)ic.gc.ca <heather.dryden(a)ic.gc.ca> CC: expertworkinggroup(a)icann.org <expertworkinggroup(a)icann.org>, Marika Konings <marika.konings(a)icann.org>, Mary Wong <mary.wong(a)icann.org>, Glen de Saint Géry <gnso-secretariat(a)gnso.icann.org>, Heidi Ullrich <Heidi.Ullrich(a)icann.org>, Steve Sheng <steve.sheng(a)icann.org>, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling(a)icann.org> Dear All: The Expert Working Group on gTLD Directory Services (EWG) has issued their Final Report <https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/final-report-06jun14-en.pdf>. Given your group's interest in this topic, I wanted to bring this to your attention, along with the public sessions the EWG has scheduled at the ICANN London meeting: * An introduction to the Final Report: EWG Overview of Final Report <http://london50.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-ewg-final-overview>, Monday, 23 June, 1515 -- 1615 * Two cross-community discussion sessions: o EWG Final Report Discussion Session <http://london50.icann.org/en/schedule/mon-ewg-final-discussion>, Monday, 23 June, 1700 - 1900 o EWG Final Report Discussion Session <http://london50.icann.org/en/schedule/wed-ewg-final-discussion>, Wednesday, 25 June, 0800 -- 1000 The Final Report fulfills the ICANN Board's directive to help redefine the purpose and provision of gTLD registration data, and provides a foundation to help the ICANN community (through the GNSO) create a new global policy for gTLD directory services. This report represents the culmination of an intense 15 month period of work during which this diverse group of volunteers <https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/gtld-directory-services-2013-02-14-en> created an alternative to today's WHOIS to better serve the global Internet community -- a next-generation Registration Directory Service (RDS). The EWG looks forward to discussing this with the ICANN community. Thank you for sharing this notice broadly. Regards, Denise Denise Michel VP Strategic Initiatives ICANN denise.michel(a)icann.org

1 0

Re: [ALAC] [ALAC-Announce] CALL FOR COMMENTS: ALAC Statement on the Board Member Compensation
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond June 6, 2014

June 6, 2014

Dear ALAC members, further to the discussions that took place on the WIKI and on the last ALAC call, the "First Draft" ended up being an exact copy of the Statement that Alan has already submitted to the PC. As a result, it makes more sense to support Alan's Statement than to repeat the Statement exactly. The suggested text is therefore: The ALAC wishes to go on record as strongly supporting the comment submitted by Alan Greenberg - http://forum.icann.org/lists/comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14/msg…. With consensus having been reached (no further comments), the vote will start shortly. Kind regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair On 29/05/2014 20:42, ICANN At-Large Staff wrote: > Dear All, > > Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, has asked that a call for comments be made on the draft ALAC Statement on the Board Member Compensation<https://community.icann.org/x/dYfhAg> in preparation for the start of the ALAC ratification process. > > The current drafts, as well as additional information on the Public Comment, can be found on the At-Large Board Member Compensation Workspace<https://community.icann.org/x/dYfhAg>. > > Please submit any comments on the workspace using the comments function by 04 June 2014 23:59 UTC. > > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Terri Agnew > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > E-mail: <mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org%3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<applewebdata://68497759-1B04-4F9B-84B7-B9445B8F305F/Regards,%20Heidi%20Ullrich,%20Silvia%20Vivanco,%20Matt%20Ashtiani,%20Ariel%20Liang,%20Gisella%20Gruber,%20Nathalie%20Peregrine%20and%20Julia%20Charvolen%20ICANN%20Policy%20Staff%20in%20support%20of%20ALACmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> > _______________________________________________ > ALAC-Announce mailing list > ALAC-Announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-announce > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.atlarge.icann.org >

1 0

Comments from Jean-Jacques Subrenat - Community call - Enhancing ICANN Accountability
by At-Large Staff June 5, 2014

June 5, 2014

Dear All, Jean-Jacques Subrenat will not be available today for the Community call today on Enhancing ICANN Accountability, scheduled Thursday 5 June 2014 at 2000 UTC. He has however, sent through the following contribution. Thank you. Kind regards, Gisella ------------- I would like to contribute to the discussion by elaborating a bit on the chapters I suggested for this discussion, 2.a the environment that the Internet and ICANN operate in; 2.b the positions of important actors in ICANN's accountability; 2.d potential proposals and actions from ALAC in the new context. I would be grateful if you would kindly circulate my remarks (below) in advance of tonight's Community Call: 2.a) THE ENVIRONMENT THAT THE INTERNET AND ICANN OPERATE IN. - While the technical and operational requirements remain crucial for the Internet (security, reliability, capacity for scaling), one of the big challenges is now Internet governance in all its complexity. - To remain meaningful, the multi-stakeholder model needs to evolve. Historically, the domain name business has been a driving force, but now it is time to - clarify the respective roles of stakeholders, including of sovereign states, - place the Internet user perspective at the centre of any reform. 2.b) THE POSITIONS OF IMPORTANT ACTORS IN ICANN'S ACCOUNTABILITY. Very schematically, - the Snowden revelations have made global Internet users aware of their fundamental rights, and the reasons put forward by public authority to lessen or negate those rights (terrorism, child pornography). The Snowden files have also amplified the call for the globalization of the Internet and its management (making ICANN more global, oversight of the IANA function...). - Without the Snowden revelations, Washington may or may not have brought forward the transfer of the oversight of the IANA function. So it is important to understand the motivation of the USG, and the choices available to Washington. - In the same manner, it is important to understand the motivation and options available to other "large" actors: Brazilia, Beijing, Moscow... - More than ever, Internet governance now requires general guidelines (the ones formulated in NetMundial can be used as a draft), and a commitment by sovereign states to actually implement them. How can ICANN achieve this? 2.d) POTENTIAL PROPOSALS AND ACTIONS FROM ALAC IN THIS CONTEXT. Suggestions: - Have a hard look at the achievements of ALAC since its inception, by reviewing - the real influence of ALAC comments and/or statements on the orientation of ICANN? - number of ALSs vs. their effective impact (local feedback, user needs)? - how can ALAC better represent the rights and requirements of Internet users? - Could a renovated ALAC agenda be implemented under the current Bylaws? - Must ALAC's work be restricted to ICANN processes only, or include the wider perspective of the global Internet users? - What improvements can ALAC propose to preserve and enhance the MSM? - What are/should be the next strategic objectives of ALAC? One or several more Board members originating from its ranks? A new arrangement of ICANN's ACs and SOs? Best regards, Jean-Jacques. > ************* > From: At-Large Staff < staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > Date: Tuesday, 3 June 2014 23:19 > To: ALAC Announce < alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Meeting Invitation / Community call - Enhancing ICANN > Accountability > > Dear All, > > Further to the Doodle poll, the At-Large Briefing session to discuss the > Public Comment on ³ Enhancing ICANN Accountability is scheduled on Thursday 05 > June 2014 at 2000 UTC for 90 minutes. > > For other times: > > http://tinyurl.com/nnly6hn > > > The agenda and call details are available at: > https://community.icann.org/x/t6ThAg > > Adobe Connect: > https://icann.adobeconnect.com/atlarge-briefing-session/ > > Participant Passcodes > > EN: 3535 > > ES: 1738 > > FR: 1838 > > Dial-in numbers: http://www.adigo.com/icann/ > > French and Spanish interpretation will be provided. > > If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at > staff(a)atlarge.icann.org with your preferred number. > > Thank you. > Regards, > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine > and Terri Agnew > > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > One World, One Internet > > > > > > From: At-Large Staff < staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > Date: Tuesday, 3 June 2014 01:21 > To: ALAC Announce < alac-announce(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > Subject: [ALAC-Announce] Urgent DOODLE / Community call - Enhancing ICANN > Accountability > > > > > > > Dear All, > > > > > Olivier Crépin-Leblond, Chair of the ALAC, has requested that a 90-minute > At-Large wide special purpose call be held to discuss the Public Comment on > ³ Enhancing ICANN Accountability .² > > > The main issues for this call include analysis of: > > > > > > 1. The environment within which the Internet and ICANN operate, > > > > > > 2. The positions of important actors in ICANN's accountability, > > > > > > 3. ICANN¹s two high-level Review Teams on Accountability and Transparency, and > 4) potential proposals and actions from ALAC in the new context. > > > > > Please complete the Doodle poll to set a time this week. > > > http://doodle.com/mbtz84p2x2vkherg > > > > > If you require interpretation for this call, please note the language next to > your name on the Doodle poll - example: ³name² + (ES) or (FR). Interpretation > will only be provided if there is sufficient demand. > > > > > This Doodle poll will close on Tuesday 3 June 2014 at 17:00 UTC the date and > time will be confirmed shortly thereafter. > > > Thank you.. > > > > > Regards, > > > > Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Ariel Liang, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine > and Terri Agnew > > ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC > > E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org > > > > One World, One Internet >

1 0

Re: [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
by Alan Greenberg May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014

What I thought Olivier saidwas that I would post my original statement to the wiki, and then based on the other input, the ALAC would either support the statement or would create a different statement of its own. If the former is chosen, I can certain draft the "The ALAC supports Alan's statement". If it is to be different, then that is not in my court - I already said what I think was important. Maybe I got it wrong. Olivier?? Alan At 28/05/2014 12:49 PM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote: >Dear Alan, > >What I understood from yesterdays call is that >you make a first draft (on the wiki) not on your >behalf, but on behalf of ALAC, and people >comment. If there is consensus, ALAC will send it as ALAC position. Am I wrong? > >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Tijani BEN JEMAA >Executive Director >Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (FMAI) >Phone: + 216 41 649 605 >Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 >Fax: + 216 70 853 376 >-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > >-----Message d'origine----- >De : alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de Alan Greenberg >Envoyé : mardi 27 mai 2014 16:59 >À : ALAC Working List >Objet : [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation > >Regarding: >https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-… > >As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following >statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment. > >I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to ><mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14@icann.org>Submit >Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may >submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement). > >------------------ > >I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am >making this comment purely in my own capacity. > >I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is >reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the >level of compensation suggested is reasonable. > >I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an >increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as >much as 29%. > >However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind, >cannot be ignored. > >- One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that >having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make >themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never >been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often >competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly >says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting >Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified >candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would >be good to see hard evidence of the rationale. > >- The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between >Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change >widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board >members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats >into their other professional activities and personal life. However, >the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in the >community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of hours >as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the >community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I >believe that this claim is accurate. > >SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of >commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are >others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board >members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort to ICANN. > >Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of >the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of the >ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be >financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that >Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really appreciate. > >Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put >Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level >contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the >privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be >repercussions. > >_______________________________________________ >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+(AL… > > > >---------- >Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus >ou logiciel malveillant parce que la protection ><http://www.avast.com/>Antivirus avast! est active.

2 2

Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
by Alan Greenberg May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014

Regarding: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-… As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment. I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to <mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14@icann.org>Submit Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement). ------------------ I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am making this comment purely in my own capacity. I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the level of compensation suggested is reasonable. I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as much as 29%. However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind, cannot be ignored. - One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would be good to see hard evidence of the rationale. - The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats into their other professional activities and personal life. However, the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in the community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of hours as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I believe that this claim is accurate. SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort to ICANN. Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of the ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really appreciate. Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be repercussions.

4 3

Re: [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
by Alan Greenberg May 28, 2014

May 28, 2014

Thanks Carlton. Please add your two cents worth to the PC. Alan At 27/05/2014 07:17 PM, Carlton Samuels wrote: >Thanks for this Alan. Closely reasoned and entirely rational and reasonable. > >I just had a situation with an At-Large outreach trip to Suriname - >I've been going to the damn place back when what passed for a classy >hotel had a caiman come up from the ditch running alongside sumbitch >so familiar he had a name, just sitting there, lollygaging in the >sun on the path separating me from the bungalow and dining! - that >makes me seethe with irritation! There seems to be an apprehension >I was looking for a handout, on account it is such a salubrious >la-de-da destination, maybe like say, Paris in the springtime (which >I don't much like anyways)! > >You have my support and I'd be honoured to sign this with you. > >-Carlton > > >============================== >Carlton A Samuels >Mobile: 876-818-1799 >Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround >============================= > > >On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 10:58 AM, Alan Greenberg ><<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> wrote: >Regarding: ><https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-…>https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-… > >As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following >statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment. > >I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to ><mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14@icann.org>Submit >Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may >submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement). > >------------------ > >I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am >making this comment purely in my own capacity. > >I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is >reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the >level of compensation suggested is reasonable. > >I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an >increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as >much as 29%. > >However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind, >cannot be ignored. > >- One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that >having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make >themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never >been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often >competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly >says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting >Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified >candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would >be good to see hard evidence of the rationale. > >- The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between >Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change >widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board >members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats >into their other professional activities and personal life. However, >the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in >the community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of >hours as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the >community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I >believe that this claim is accurate. > >SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of >commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are >others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board >members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort to ICANN. > >Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of >the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of >the ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be >financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that >Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really appreciate. > >Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put >Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level >contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the >privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be >repercussions. > >_______________________________________________ >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

Re: [ALAC] Public Comment on Board Liaison compensation
by Alan Greenberg May 27, 2014

May 27, 2014

The comment is now posted. The only change was to remove "for non-Chairs" from the second to last paragraph. It sounded like I was demanding Chair compensation, and although I might support that, it was not the intent of this comment. Alan At 27/05/2014 11:58 AM, Alan Greenberg wrote: >Regarding: >https://www.icann.org/public-comments/bylaws-amend-compensation-2014-05-02-… > >As discussed on the ALAC call today, I will be posting the following >statement (subject to minor editing) to the ICANN Public Comment. > >I encourage anyone who supports this to submit a comment to ><mailto:comments-bylaws-amend-compensation-02may14@icann.org>Submit >Comment to Forum. I also understand that the ALAC is itself may >submit a statement as well (either support or a separate statement). > >------------------ > >I am a member of the ALAC and the ALAC Liaison to the GNSO, but I am >making this comment purely in my own capacity. > >I believe that, subject to a number of related considerations, it is >reasonable to compensate Board members, including Liaisons, and the >level of compensation suggested is reasonable. > >I do note that in the name of simplification, the report suggests an >increase for Board members who are not Board Committee Chairs by as >much as 29%. > >However, the related considerations mentioned above, in my mind, >cannot be ignored. > >- One of the reasons always sited for such compensation is that >having no compensation limits the available candidates who will make >themselves available for the ICANN Board. Given that there has never >been an AC/SO seat vacant due to lack of candidates, there is often >competition for such seats, and the Nominating Committee regularly >says that it has had to make very difficult decisions in selecting >Board members since there was a surplus of eminently qualified >candidates, in the name of transparency and accountability, it would >be good to see hard evidence of the rationale. > >- The introduction of Board compensation widened the gulf between >Board members and other volunteers within ICANN. The proposed change >widens that gulf further. There is no question that many Board >members work very hard on behalf of ICANN, and that dedication eats >into their other professional activities and personal life. However, >the same can be said for many ICANN volunteers. There are many in >the community who work equally hard and dedicate the same kind of >hours as Board members. Indeed, it has been claimed that many in the >community put in far more time and effort than some Board members. I >believe that this claim is accurate. > >SO and AC Chairs have been identified as meeting the above levels of >commitment, and indeed many or perhaps all do. However, there are >others who do not receive the existing benefits given to Board >members and AC/SO Chairs who also dedicate unending hours and effort to ICANN. > >Board and now Liaison compensation without any new consideration of >the contributions of others denigrates the efforts of the rest of >the ICANN volunteers. Such acknowledgment for non-Chairs need not be >financial compensation - there are a host of other benefits that >Board members get that other volunteers (and Chairs) would really appreciate. > >Although I understand the difficulty of identifying those who put >Herculean efforts into ICANN from those who are lower level >contributors, we cannot continue to widen the gulf between the >privileged few and the rest of volunteers and expect there not to be >repercussions.

1 0