ALS Communications Program - For Discussion
I agree Alan. It is already a description of the bottom up system. When it is finished, the circuit will be closed, with procedures, for the generation of policies: End User - ALS - RALO - ALAC coordinating with the other multiple interested parties, and then advising ICANN. Regards Alberto -----Mensaje original----- De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Alan Greenberg Enviado el: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 2:19 AM Para: ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: [ALAC] ALS Communications Program - For Discussion Please find attached document for discussion on Tuesday. Alan
Excelent. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Mar 14, 2017, at 2:19 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Please find attached document for discussion on Tuesday.
Alan <ALS-Member_Engagement-Plan-v02.pdf> _______________________________________________ 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...)
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.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...)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html
Hi Olivier No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources G Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On 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 listALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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...)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://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+ Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
We cannot set our own traps ourselves like this. We are sometimes the best allies of our worst adversaries. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Olivier
No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources
G
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On 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.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...)
-- 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+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...)
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. satish On 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-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Olivier
No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources
G
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On 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 listALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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...)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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)
_______________________________________________ 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)
I can't see why they didn't reach out and do a presentation to each of the active WG for the feedback and suggestions G Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On 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.
satish
On 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-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 <(787)%20396-6511> twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Olivier
No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources
G
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On 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 listALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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...)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
Dear all, As much as I recognise the importance of going through RALO, i think we should remember that this document is an outcome of the task we gave ourselves as ALAC last year (was discussed during the ICANN57 meeting). It's not something that just started today hence its important we put that into perspective. That said, i believe it will be useless if this ALAC document doesn't receive the blessing of the RALO, hence i suggest that be the next phase and I would recommend that we give this high level document to the RALO leadership to discuss and then provide their responses regarding how they like to implement this. On the long run results should be what ALAC should be most interested in and not on how various RALO implement this. Certainly, implementation of various parts of the document will require various working groups (let's hope that term remains after the review ;-)) and I expect that this will get to such level. Regards On 14 Mar 2017 16:57, "Glenn McKnight" <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
I can't see why they didn't reach out and do a presentation to each of the active WG for the feedback and suggestions G
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On 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.
satish
On 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-Jovet
+1-787-396-6511 <(787)%20396-6511> twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua
On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Olivier
No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources
G
Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight .
On 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 listALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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...)
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhDhttp://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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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/di splay/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+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)
+1 Glenn, Olivier and Javier. Regards Alberto De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de Javier Rua Enviado el: Tuesday, March 14, 2017 4:41 PM Para: Glenn McKnight <mcker and Javiernight.glenn@gmail.com> CC: ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Asunto: Re: [ALAC] ALS Communications Program - For Discussion We cannot set our own traps ourselves like this. We are sometimes the best allies of our worst adversaries. Javier Rúa-Jovet +1-787-396-6511 twitter: @javrua skype: javier.rua1 https://www.linkedin.com/in/javrua On Mar 14, 2017, at 4:39 PM, Glenn McKnight <mcknight.glenn@gmail.com <mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> > wrote: Hi Olivier No idea why this document wasn't presented to our WG's. We are working in silos Since this is dealing with communication, we clearly missed an opportunity I guess those led this document are part of the 95% who agree with ITEMS that WG are a waste of time and resources G Glenn McKnight mcknight.glenn@gmail.com <mailto:mcknight.glenn@gmail.com> skype gmcknight twitter gmcknight . On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com <mailto: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 <mailto: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...) -- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org <mailto: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 <mailto: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...)
participants (7)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Alberto Soto -
Glenn McKnight -
Javier Rua -
Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond -
Satish Babu -
Seun Ojedeji