Follow-Up on OFB Meeting – CIP Comment Timeline Review
Dear ALAC Colleagues, I hope this message finds you well. As agreed during the OFB meeting last Thursday, I am sending you a formal, detailed review of the CIP comment drafting timeline, which has been prepared by the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and myself (Joanna Kulesza, undersigned below, currently serving as the ALAC Liaison to the GAC) attached to this message. In response to the request made, we have provided a comprehensive recap of the events surrounding the development of this document. You can find the original document, as submitted by the drafting team for the ALAC vote, also attached for your review. This document includes all the recommendations that resulted from the inclusive and open process, which has been the standard for developing consensus within the At-Large community. We would like to express once again our continuing disappointment with the processes that have accompanied the drafting of this document, in particular the lack of transparency and accountability that has been identified. We hope that this difficult situation will serve as a catalyst for improving internal procedures to promote greater transparency and clearer accountability mechanisms for all those involved in the preparation of At-Large documents. Ultimately, we seek real progress — not just 'continuous' effort - in improving the multi-stakeholder model for decision making within the ICANN community and, in particular, for the benefit of the unique end-user community whose interests we aspire to represent. We look forward to continuing our work together to address these important issues. Best regards, Joanna Kulesza (on behalf of the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and Joanna Kulesza)
Joanna, Thanks for taking the time to put together this comprehensive timeline of events. I can personally attest that this particular holiday season, including the fires in Los Angeles has been fraught with distractions. I take personal responsibility for how this fell through the cracks and folks were allowed to continue down the wrong path. I felt important, regardless of the effort to correct what we were submitting for this particular RFC so that our submission would be on point. So again, I take responsibility for how sloppy the substitution was at the last minute. That said, I think we did the right thing but we are left with a couple of unresolved issues. First, how do we avoid this sort of situation in the future and what is the best way to proceed now with our CIP efforts to capture the enormous efforts put into this document by you, Marita and Maureen. On the first point, it's a bit ironic that the issue at hand, in this case, is continuous improvement as many of the issues you have raised fit into that basket. We need to find our way to an efficient but equitable process to get informed consensus both from the WGs and ultimately the ALAC. It is certainly MY impression that we have the most difficulty with informed consensus when we start with a draft document rather than an outline, presented to the WG (CPWG or OFBWG). If we can reach informed consensus on the main points we would like to make in a particular comment, there's less concern about everyone absorbing the details. When we start with a document, it it becomes a sort of self-selected appraisal process, rather than a discuss towards consensus. Consequently, I have been advocating for each comment to begin as an outline, and presented orally to the WG. Once we have rough consensus on the main points, drafters would expand on those points in a written document. At that point, those evaluating that draft would simply be looking for a faithful representation of agreed on points, not trying to assess whether the points being made are appropriate. My interventions on this have been informal to date but long standing but the time has come to formalize them so, together with Andrew and the ATL, I will endeavor to bring this process to the ALAC as a formal process with well-defined roles. We'll discuss from there. As for the work already done, it certainly provides fodder for discussion on the ALAC CIP document that we still need to compose. While I cannot guarantee that everything from this effort will make it into the final document, as it is still subject to discussion, I suspect a great majority of it will find it's way into our final communication. It's not time wasted, though I'm sure that having spent that time during the holidays makes it particularly precious time. We will through our CIP plans for the ALAC endeavor to explore your proposals in detail and engage with you on the best path forward to a final document. I hope this makes sense and I'm more than happy to get on a call with the three of you, if that would be helpful but I believe we have a path forward. Again, I apologize for the missteps over the holiday season that led to extra work by this small team. We appreciate all that you do. Jonathan ALAC Chair ________________________________ From: Joanna Kulesza via ALAC <alac@icann.org> Sent: Monday, January 20, 2025 12:41 AM To: alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> Subject: [ALAC] Follow-Up on OFB Meeting – CIP Comment Timeline Review Dear ALAC Colleagues, I hope this message finds you well. As agreed during the OFB meeting last Thursday, I am sending you a formal, detailed review of the CIP comment drafting timeline, which has been prepared by the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and myself (Joanna Kulesza, undersigned below, currently serving as the ALAC Liaison to the GAC) attached to this message. In response to the request made, we have provided a comprehensive recap of the events surrounding the development of this document. You can find the original document, as submitted by the drafting team for the ALAC vote, also attached for your review. This document includes all the recommendations that resulted from the inclusive and open process, which has been the standard for developing consensus within the At-Large community. We would like to express once again our continuing disappointment with the processes that have accompanied the drafting of this document, in particular the lack of transparency and accountability that has been identified. We hope that this difficult situation will serve as a catalyst for improving internal procedures to promote greater transparency and clearer accountability mechanisms for all those involved in the preparation of At-Large documents. Ultimately, we seek real progress — not just 'continuous' effort - in improving the multi-stakeholder model for decision making within the ICANN community and, in particular, for the benefit of the unique end-user community whose interests we aspire to represent. We look forward to continuing our work together to address these important issues. Best regards, Joanna Kulesza (on behalf of the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and Joanna Kulesza)
Dear Jonathan, I tend to agree with your perspective. Initiating drafting without first achieving consensus on the outline may lead those with differing viewpoints not to further contribute, perceiving themselves as off-track or lacking understanding of what is required from the group. It can also lead to a collection of disjoint ideas that lack cohesion. I also agree that this topic falls under the CIP which both ALAC and the RALOs are working on. AFRALO has developed its CIP, approved by consensus, and we look forward to prioritizing and implementing its initiatives. Best wishes Hadia Elminiawi AFRALO Chair On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 01:24, Jonathan Zuck via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Joanna,
Thanks for taking the time to put together this comprehensive timeline of events. I can personally attest that this particular holiday season, including the fires in Los Angeles has been fraught with distractions. I take personal responsibility for how this fell through the cracks and folks were allowed to continue down the wrong path. I felt important, regardless of the effort to correct what we were submitting for this particular RFC so that our submission would be on point. So again, I take responsibility for how sloppy the substitution was at the last minute. That said, I think we did the right thing but we are left with a couple of unresolved issues. First, how do we avoid this sort of situation in the future and what is the best way to proceed now with our CIP efforts to capture the enormous efforts put into this document by you, Marita and Maureen.
On the first point, it's a bit ironic that the issue at hand, in this case, is continuous improvement as many of the issues you have raised fit into that basket. We need to find our way to an efficient but equitable process to get informed consensus both from the WGs and ultimately the ALAC. It is certainly MY impression that we have the most difficulty with informed consensus when we start with a draft document rather than an outline, presented to the WG (CPWG or OFBWG). If we can reach informed consensus on the main points we would like to make in a particular comment, there's less concern about everyone absorbing the details. When we start with a document, it it becomes a sort of self-selected appraisal process, rather than a discuss towards consensus. Consequently, I have been advocating for each comment to begin as an outline, and presented orally to the WG. Once we have rough consensus on the main points, drafters would expand on those points in a written document. At that point, those evaluating that draft would simply be looking for a faithful representation of agreed on points, not trying to assess whether the points being made are appropriate. My interventions on this have been informal to date but long standing but the time has come to formalize them so, together with Andrew and the ATL, I will endeavor to bring this process to the ALAC as a formal process with well-defined roles. We'll discuss from there.
As for the work already done, it certainly provides fodder for discussion on the ALAC CIP document that we still need to compose. While I cannot guarantee that everything from this effort will make it into the final document, as it is still subject to discussion, I suspect a great majority of it will find it's way into our final communication. It's not time wasted, though I'm sure that having spent that time during the holidays makes it particularly precious time. We will through our CIP plans for the ALAC endeavor to explore your proposals in detail and engage with you on the best path forward to a final document.
I hope this makes sense and I'm more than happy to get on a call with the three of you, if that would be helpful but I believe we have a path forward. Again, I apologize for the missteps over the holiday season that led to extra work by this small team. We appreciate all that you do.
Jonathan ALAC Chair
------------------------------ *From:* Joanna Kulesza via ALAC <alac@icann.org> *Sent:* Monday, January 20, 2025 12:41 AM *To:* alac@icann.org <alac@icann.org> *Subject:* [ALAC] Follow-Up on OFB Meeting – CIP Comment Timeline Review
Dear ALAC Colleagues,
I hope this message finds you well.
As agreed during the OFB meeting last Thursday, I am sending you a formal, detailed review of the CIP comment drafting timeline, which has been prepared by the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and myself (Joanna Kulesza, undersigned below, currently serving as the ALAC Liaison to the GAC) attached to this message. In response to the request made, we have provided a comprehensive recap of the events surrounding the development of this document.
You can find the original document, as submitted by the drafting team for the ALAC vote, also attached for your review. This document includes all the recommendations that resulted from the inclusive and open process, which has been the standard for developing consensus within the At-Large community.
We would like to express once again our continuing disappointment with the processes that have accompanied the drafting of this document, in particular the lack of transparency and accountability that has been identified. We hope that this difficult situation will serve as a catalyst for improving internal procedures to promote greater transparency and clearer accountability mechanisms for all those involved in the preparation of At-Large documents. Ultimately, we seek real progress — not just 'continuous' effort - in improving the multi-stakeholder model for decision making within the ICANN community and, in particular, for the benefit of the unique end-user community whose interests we aspire to represent.
We look forward to continuing our work together to address these important issues.
Best regards,
Joanna Kulesza
(on behalf of the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and Joanna Kulesza) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Dear all Transparency and accountability within ALAC have long been an issue because we have refused to address most of the root causes, among which are some individuals treating ALAC as their full-time responsibility(Job), imposing their way as the ONLY way. Unfortunately, many have chosen to remain silent. While I am not surprised by these events, what truly surprises me is the overwhelming silence in the face of it. Maybe we are all growing older like myself and have decided to allow everything to slide. I see this as yet another wake-up call for us to confront these issues. I know this will likely be swept under the carpet, as usual, with the Chair offering a vague explanation without addressing the real issue because ......( i complete this another day). However, we must strive to emulate other SOs and ACs within ICANN, where transparency and openness are upheld. There are many better examples we can follow. Each time I reflect on ALAC and my time, it pains me deeply. *Prof. A. A. Oloyede*. *Full Professor of Wireless Telecommunications* *Department of Telecommunications Science, University of Ilorin, Nigeria* *Director, Centre for Research Development and In-House Training (CREDIT) University of Ilorin, Nigeria* On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 9:41 AM Joanna Kulesza via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear ALAC Colleagues,
I hope this message finds you well.
As agreed during the OFB meeting last Thursday, I am sending you a formal, detailed review of the CIP comment drafting timeline, which has been prepared by the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and myself (Joanna Kulesza, undersigned below, currently serving as the ALAC Liaison to the GAC) attached to this message. In response to the request made, we have provided a comprehensive recap of the events surrounding the development of this document.
You can find the original document, as submitted by the drafting team for the ALAC vote, also attached for your review. This document includes all the recommendations that resulted from the inclusive and open process, which has been the standard for developing consensus within the At-Large community.
We would like to express once again our continuing disappointment with the processes that have accompanied the drafting of this document, in particular the lack of transparency and accountability that has been identified. We hope that this difficult situation will serve as a catalyst for improving internal procedures to promote greater transparency and clearer accountability mechanisms for all those involved in the preparation of At-Large documents. Ultimately, we seek real progress — not just 'continuous' effort - in improving the multi-stakeholder model for decision making within the ICANN community and, in particular, for the benefit of the unique end-user community whose interests we aspire to represent.
We look forward to continuing our work together to address these important issues.
Best regards,
Joanna Kulesza
(on behalf of the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and Joanna Kulesza) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-- Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng>, Weekly Bulletin <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal <http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal <https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> HelpDesk <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/more-resources/e-notices/6845-how-to-re...>
Hello all, Dear, Joanna, Maureen, Marita. Thank you for the work you have done. As a participant of the CIP I see in it a real opportunity for our improvement (on RALO level and in the At-Large - ALAC interaction we all are so waiting for). Your analysis and comments on CIP construction is professional and valuable. And the situation with the doc and records is ugly. Dear At-Large colleagues, Isn't it? I would support you, ladies and follow Abdulkarim's message. We have changed (looks like cancelled without community's decision) a lot in our approaches to consolidated work, to respect volunteer work, to take into account the opinion of the community, to transparency and accountability and responsibility. Unfortunately and definitely, as a result, there is a lack of motivation and active participation in the work, less bottom-up components, fewer and fewer expectations of taking into account At-Large as a main and only one source of... Everithing for ALAC - expertise, energy, feedback from the local community etc, ideas, knowledge etc. That's why - silence here, people (volunteers especially) working where they trust. We have to go to our classic way to build the community together. Maybe this situation will help us to wake up? Sincerely, Natalia Filina Secretary of EURALO https://atlarge.icann.org/alses/euralo IGF Dynamic Coalition on the Internet of Things, member DotDucky <https://dotducky.com/> owner 🐣 +7 906 722 54 61 Moscow, Russia чт, 6 февр. 2025 г., 09:09 Abdulkarim Oloyede via ALAC <alac@icann.org>:
Dear all
Transparency and accountability within ALAC have long been an issue because we have refused to address most of the root causes, among which are some individuals treating ALAC as their full-time responsibility(Job), imposing their way as the ONLY way. Unfortunately, many have chosen to remain silent. While I am not surprised by these events, what truly surprises me is the overwhelming silence in the face of it. Maybe we are all growing older like myself and have decided to allow everything to slide.
I see this as yet another wake-up call for us to confront these issues. I know this will likely be swept under the carpet, as usual, with the Chair offering a vague explanation without addressing the real issue because ......( i complete this another day). However, we must strive to emulate other SOs and ACs within ICANN, where transparency and openness are upheld. There are many better examples we can follow.
Each time I reflect on ALAC and my time, it pains me deeply.
*Prof. A. A. Oloyede*. *Full Professor of Wireless Telecommunications* *Department of Telecommunications Science, University of Ilorin, Nigeria* *Director, Centre for Research Development and In-House Training (CREDIT) University of Ilorin, Nigeria*
On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 9:41 AM Joanna Kulesza via ALAC <alac@icann.org> wrote:
Dear ALAC Colleagues,
I hope this message finds you well.
As agreed during the OFB meeting last Thursday, I am sending you a formal, detailed review of the CIP comment drafting timeline, which has been prepared by the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and myself (Joanna Kulesza, undersigned below, currently serving as the ALAC Liaison to the GAC) attached to this message. In response to the request made, we have provided a comprehensive recap of the events surrounding the development of this document.
You can find the original document, as submitted by the drafting team for the ALAC vote, also attached for your review. This document includes all the recommendations that resulted from the inclusive and open process, which has been the standard for developing consensus within the At-Large community.
We would like to express once again our continuing disappointment with the processes that have accompanied the drafting of this document, in particular the lack of transparency and accountability that has been identified. We hope that this difficult situation will serve as a catalyst for improving internal procedures to promote greater transparency and clearer accountability mechanisms for all those involved in the preparation of At-Large documents. Ultimately, we seek real progress — not just 'continuous' effort - in improving the multi-stakeholder model for decision making within the ICANN community and, in particular, for the benefit of the unique end-user community whose interests we aspire to represent.
We look forward to continuing our work together to address these important issues.
Best regards,
Joanna Kulesza
(on behalf of the drafting team: Maureen Hilyard, Marita Moll, and Joanna Kulesza) _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
Website <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng>, Weekly Bulletin <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/bulletin> UGPortal <http://uilugportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> PGPortal <https://uilpgportal.unilorin.edu.ng/> HelpDesk <http://www.unilorin.edu.ng/index.php/more-resources/e-notices/6845-how-to-re...>
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list -- alac@icann.org To unsubscribe send an email to alac-leave@icann.org
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...) _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
participants (5)
-
Abdulkarim Oloyede -
hadia Elminiawi -
Joanna Kulesza -
Jonathan Zuck -
Natalia Filina