Thanks Alan. In APRALO we were wanting to provide some guidelines for anyone who does not want to align themselves to a particular ALS but wants to be an independent member in our region. I am working in some of the ideas we have raised in our ALS criteria discussions Are the expectations about participation, promotion of ICANN and its activities within community and ensuring that this engagement is published somehow.. blog, website, personal facebook etc - the same for indivs as they are for als groups? Why shouldnt they be? It would still be interesting to know why they dont align themselves with others. How do they fit into our At-Large structure? We are making a high level of expectations for ALSes, can we make the same of individuals eg who want to be part of ALAC but who are also members of a number of other constituencies as well... and are really doing nothing in depth with At-Large. In my ALS... I have a member who heads the ict unit of the PMs office so naturally she follows the GAC.. another works for the local ISP so I am trying to get him to come along to the ccNSO meetings. We are only an island of 9000 people. The chances of getting 3 people who are committed to end-user policy would be pushing it a bit. But they all hear what the ALAC and APRALO are up to in ICANN and within the region on our website. ☺ Maureen On 2/03/2016 11:29 pm, "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

At the moment, the individual member rules vary from region to region (where there are any at all). There is a different Design Team within the ALS Review TF looking at this (led by Cheryl).

For NA, the unaffiliated (that is the term used in the Operating Principles) members elect a Representative who is functionally equivalent to an ALS Representative and who may cast votes (when there are any) and participate in any other NARALO activity where ALSes are present. For votes, it is a directed vote based on the votes of the unaffiliated member using a private poll (sometimes BigPulse, sometimes less formal).

One interesting question that comes up is should an unaffilitated membber who also belongs to NCSG vote?

Alan

At 03/03/2016 02:54 AM, Judith Hellerstein wrote:HI Maureen,

In NARALO we have individual members but they are not an ALS. They are called non-aligned. The non-aliugned members choose one person who votes their slate. I do not think these new rules affect them but Alan could verify as he is an Individual Member of NARALO

Best, Judith

_________________________________________________________________________ Judith Hellerstein, Founder & CEO Hellerstein & Associates 3001 Veazey Terrace NW, Washington DC 20008 Phone: (202) 362-5139 Skype ID: judithhellerstein E-mail:Judith@jhellerstein.com Website:www.jhellerstein.com Linked In: www.linkedin.com/in/jhellerstein/ Opening Telecom & Technology Opportunities Worldwide

On 3/3/2016 6:54 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

One query - what about individual members who are an ALS of one.

They don't automatically have voting rights unless they are the elected rep of indiv members from within the region - that's the current model, I believe (for those RALOs who have indiv members)

M

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 11:53 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca

...

wrote: There will be a discussion in Marrakech with the intent of finalizing a draft proposal.

Please find attached the a document with the current list of issues raised within the ALS Review TF.

Alan _______________________________________________ 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...) <https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+%28A...>

_______________________________________________ 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... )

_______________________________________________ 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...)

Hi Evan As my ALS is an incorporated society I have to provide an annual report for my members (and our Ministry of Justice or they strike us off the register.) I must admit that adding information about At-Large activities and our involvement certainly adds more colour and interest than if I was relying on the same old same old on our little island and didnt have a story to tell. It goes on our website so At-Large is also notified. Task done to cover a range of stakeholder expectations. No big deal. On with everything else we're involved in. ☺ Regards Maureen On 3/03/2016 12:56 am, "Evan Leibovitch" <evan@telly.org> wrote:

On 3 March 2016 at 10:20, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

One interesting question that comes up is should an unaffilitated membber who also belongs to NCSG vote?

​With due respect. That's not an interesting question; in fact it's utterly pointless.

In ICANN, multiple entry vectors for participation abound. Anyone who is part of one or more communities is welcome to make public comments on their own, in addition to (and maybe even totally counter to) the views of those communities.

In ICANN's particular brand of multistakeholderism, there is no such thing as conflict of interest so long as you declare. In this environment, I consider issues such as the question Alan raised ​as distractions which -- deliberately or not -- divert our community's energy away from policy and matters of substance,

​towards never-ending introspection incapable of constructive outcome. ​ Then again, I see most of the realm of discussion of "*ALS Criteria and Expectations*" (even the title is buffoonish) to be in this light.

Expectations? Really? is being an ALS some kind of great bloody prize against which we can draw up lists of demands? By its very application (and willingness to be subjected to due diligence) the ALS has indicated an interest in participating. The level or specificity of that participation ought not to be judged by an At-Large community that makes noises about being inclusive and welcoming.

*Annual reports?* *Are you freaking kidding me?* Needless work for ALSs to create. Needless work for volunteers to review. Needless misuse of staff resources to manage. Whatever people or group came up with that particular bit of stupidity should be spanked.

If an ALS contributes one valuable commentary of substance in a year -- in FIVE years -- that is still more valuable than if they were not here. If there are issues about voting -- be they regarding quorum or attempts to game elections -- then deal with that. But for heaven's sake, there should only be three reasons to decertify an ALS:

1. It no longer exists 2. It is abusive of others (and that requires a high bar ​ of evidence​ ) 3. Unsolicited, it asks to leave ​

​If the goal is to prevent "freeloaders" from getting subsidized to travel to assemblies, that's legit -- such minimum participation requirements exist for the Summits and General Assemblies that have already taken place. But the mere status of being an ALS is not so ​ ​ ​precious that it demands periodic review and renewal. The cost to service a quiet ALS is near zero.

​Yes, we have a massive challenge to participation. In no small part that is because we try to speak for the interests of a global end-user community whose members, on the whole, doesn't really care about domain name governance. Or if they do, there is some specialized part of it that concerns them only on certain occasions -- this is why infrequent participation should not be grounds for jettisoning an ALS.​

​This issue of "ALS Expectations"​ is not only unimportant, the expenditure of non-zero effort on this is IMO a major source of embarrassment of At-Large that will seriously impair future outreach.

​I await the opportunity to ignore the request for annual reports. Do your worst.​

*​Now go do some policy work*. Please. Before the contraction starts.​

​​- Evan

_______________________________________________ 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...)

To add a bit of history to this, Consumers Union (or a part of it) was an ALS at the time tey employed someone who cased about this type of thing. That unit folded and they are no longer an ALS. Alan At 03/03/2016 03:46 AM, Kan Kaili wrote:

Hi,

My understanding of the very reason that the individual-led criterea of an ALS is that, ALAC and RALOs are established to represent and to protect consumers' interests.

Thus, as long as an entity can demonstrate that it indeed -- plays the role of protecting consumer interest -- is financially independent and not-for-profit -- is non-governmental I believe it should qualify as an ALS.

For example, if the Consumers Union, the NGO/NPO publisher of Consumers Report, gains related Internet expertise and applies to become an ALS, it should be welcomed. In fact, I believe that it would be much more capable in protecting consumers' interests than seperately grouped individual consumers.

Furthermore, this will help our out-reach tremendusly, and help to smooth out the "civil society" vs. ALAC issue.

Best regards, Kaili

----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Greenberg" <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> To: "ALAC" <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2016 6:53 AM Subject: [ALAC] ALS Criteria and Expectations

...

There will be a discussion in Marrakech with the intent of finalizing a draft proposal.

Please find attached the a document with the current list of issues raised within the ALS Review TF.

Alan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

...

_______________________________________________ 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...)