I can't see why they didn't reach out and do a presentation to each of the active WG for the feedback and suggestionsGOn Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:54 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote:While I agree on most parts of the contents of the document, there appears to be a significant process issue here, as pointed out. RALOs as well as the relevant WGs need to be given an opportunity to go through the document and to provide their comments, before it is adopted.satishOn Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 4:41 PM, Javier Rua <javrua@gmail.com> wrote:We cannot set our own traps ourselves like this. We are sometimes the best allies of our worst adversaries.
Javier Rúa-JovetHi OlivierNo idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silosSince this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunityI guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resourcesGOn Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:Dear Alan,
I am sorry, but I do not understand why the At-Large working groups that deal with exactly this type of work are not included and kept more up to date about this work that was going on.
- At-Large Social Media Working Group
- ALAC Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement
The RALOs were not involved or informed of progress either.
As a result, I have just lived a 1 hour groundhog day, that is, a repetition of all of the discussions that have taken place at RALO and RALO Secretariat and at working group level, with questions being asked in the document, that are already being addressed, and some already being responded to; with people making points that have already been made at RALO and RALO Secretariat and at working group level.
On the one hand, we defend the need for the At-Large Community to have working groups and RALOs. On the other, we completely sideline them by having an ad-hoc ALS Communication Plan Task Force and a document that gets sent to the ALAC working list only (and no other lists).
We really need to look at what we do objectively and decide whether we want to practice what we preach or not. Otherwise, we risk being accused of schizophrenia or, worse still, hypocrisy.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 14/03/2017 02:19, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Please find attached document for discussion on Tuesday.
Alan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.or g/mailman/listinfo/alac At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisor y+Committee+(ALAC)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@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+Advisor y+Committee+(ALAC) _______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@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+Advisor y+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@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+Advisor y+Committee+(ALAC)
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@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+(ALAC)