Correct. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Feb 13, 2017, at 2:07 PM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote:
There are 8 territories in NA region * American Samoa * Canada * Guam * Northern Mariana Islands * Puerto Rico * United States Minor Outlying Islands * United States * Virgin Islands, U.S.
Dev Anand
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> wrote: In NARALO there are only two countries - Canada and USA (Puerto Rico is a colony of USA and considered under the USA umbrella).
-ed
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 12:06 PM Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: I see what you mean Eduardo.
For example, one chapter per country would limit the number of voting chapters at election time for some regions... . How many countries in NARALO? I think there are over 70 in APRALO.
Will regions have to be changed to allow for more equitable distribution of country chapters? I am sure that Cheryl would love to start that discussion over again... NOT!
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 5:41 AM, Eduardo Diaz <eduardodiazrivera@gmail.com> wrote: I lik ethe idea but need more thinking in its implementation.
For one, by-laws (or something similar) are needed, specially when it come to vote for the regional representatives. We need to think if organization can become members of these chapters an so on. There could be one chapter per country with one vote per country in the region. Still you need to manage all the chapters in the region. Just thinking out loud.
-ed
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 10:52 AM Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: I like your idea of ICANN chapters within a country or perhaps a subregion of a large country.
As an ex-Pres of our Rotary Chapter, I find the Rotary concept interesting, but it does set a model that would encourage a wider opportunity for outreach as well as education and training, and policy input at a country level.. and all organised by the members. Rotary is also self-funding but with the opportunity to get funding from the parent body for special projects.
But it would also mobilise large groups of individual members who at least have a lot of things in common already as a starting point - language and culture,socio-politics, shared internet environment, etc
Sounds a little like the Internet Society of China model with everyone in one country under one umbrella.
On Mon, Feb 13, 2017 at 4:04 AM, Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> wrote: Here's an idea for an alternative proposal for At-Large to the EMM model proposed in the At-Large Review
My thoughts - The proposed EMM has flaws. Some immediate ones :
- it destroys the community and with that, the consensus building of community with replacement of individuals with even less ties to the public community. Such individuals will promote and collude with other individuals to keep themselves in the loop. Also, with many of the policy discussions in GNSO being English, this permanently eliminates persons from developing/emerging economies from non-English from ever participating. - given that any individual could already participate in GNSO, we would be no different from such random individuals - it removes the mandate on oversight and accountability on ICANN activities from end user interests - a thousand individuals in one large country will override 10 individuals from a small country so there will be less diversity in the EMM model only from those countries with large number of individuals. - Nomcom appointees to ALAC new to ICANN will serve as Liasions to other groups is not sensible
There are many more problems but I want to focus on a IMO a better At-Large model than the EMM one:
- ICANN establishes At-Large Chapters in each country similiar in concept to Rotary or ISOC chapters. - each chapter is open to anyone interested in ICANN from the interests of end users. - ICANN can set guidelines for each chapter - some examples: must do certain level of outreach, have term limits, have a public F2F awareness meeting to recruit new persons. ICANN would need to provide some funding to make this happen but this would be small and the chapters can account to ICANN for expenses. - ICANN can provide the tools (mailing lists, conference tools) to facilitate online discussions. - Because there is a consistent brand - At-Large Chapter in the country, marketing/promoting is greatly simplified and easier to explain. - Given that such chapters are virtual, it makes chapters easy to establish with only a few individuals from a country without the challenges of having formal organisations with bylaws and pay taxes.
So an At-Large chapter ends up being a virtual ALS in each country in the ALAC/RALO/ALS model.
The RALOs will consist of the chapters from each country in the region with each chapter electing two persons to coordinate the RALO work. The RALO will be better positioned to better fulfil its MOUs with ICANN and the RALO and ALAC would not have to bother with analysing whether an organisation meets the criteria of an ALS.
The At-Large chapters will be better able to network with At-Large chapters in other countries and build consensus on policy issues and help promote and grow the At-Large Community.
--- Dev Anand
_______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ 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+(ALA...)
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org