Hi Alan, I agree that disclosure is the best remedy. Just one general comment. Are the rules reciprocal? We have had instances in which members of other constituencies have tried (sometimes ... energetically) to influence At-Large positions and in some cases disrupt what might otherwise be consensus. While often being candid and open about the cross-participation, I have on numerous times heard the "I may work for a contracted but I'm an end-user too!" refrain upon confrontation. I would hesitate to put many limitations, or disclosures, on At-Large participants contributing elsewhere in ICANN if there is no reciprocity. To this end I would suggest that anyone participating in a substantive discussion in either a RALO or an At-Large WG (who is not a verifiable individual RALO participant or member of an ALS) should be obligated to file and maintain an accurate SOI, I had to have one on file anytime I did anything touching the GNSO, so it's not like we'd be creating an imbalance, And anyone without conflicts could do the SOI very quickly. - Evan

Let good sense prevail! Both sensible recommendations. Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Process, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Sun, Apr 19, 2020 at 11:41 PM Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

*This is a long message, but the issue is important. Please take the time to read it carefully. This particularly applies to current ALAC Members and RALO Leaders. *Over the past years, there have been many discussions about whether it is problematic to have both individuals and ALSes associated with At-Large to be members (or voting members) of other parts of the ICANN Community (and in particular, NCSG).

These issues have never been resolved, and although they have come up for discussion regularly, addressing them has always been deferred.

To the extent that these issues fall under the remit of the ALS-Mobilization Working Party (WP), they have been discussed at length.

We are in the process of finalizing our report on ALS Expectations and Criteria, and as such have tentatively finalized our recommendation related to these areas. I would like to present them to this group so that any comments can be brought back to the WP.

We looked at two areas: 1. Whether there is any problem with ALS representatives joining and participating in other parts of ICANN 2. Whether an organization that is an ALS can be an institutional member of some other part of ICANN

To set the stage, one should note: - we have MANY individuals associated with At-Large (including ALAC Members) who are members of NCSG and a few who are members of various other parts of the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, SSAC, the Board and no doubt other parts of ICANN; - we have about 40 ALSes that are also institutional members of NCSG. - Other groups, particularly within the GNSO have rules that multiple memberships may exist, but only once can have vote-casting privileges (such as between the Registrar and Registry SGs, or the Business and Intellectual Property Constituencies). There also rules that prohibit multiple memberships in specific situations.

*1. ALS Representatives *There was virtually no concern with an ALS Representative being a non-voting member of some other part of ICANN (presuming the concept of a non-voting member applies to that other group). ALS Reps may cast votes within RALOs (either based on their own views or directed by their ALS leadership or membership (we do NOT tell ALSes how to conduct their affairs). There was some concern about an ALS Rep doing so while also holding a vote in some other part of ICANN. However, there was a very strong consensus that the nature of votes within a RALO, and the impact that these votes have on substantive policy issues or the selection of individuals was not sufficiently large as to warrant rules prohibiting such involvement. The group did however strongly support full disclosure of any such overlaps.

According, our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition on an ALS Representative holding roles in other parts of ICANN (non-At-Large), but those roles comparable to those listed below must be formally declared.

a) Member of another constituent part of ICANN (AC/SO, sub-constituency) b) Leadership role in any of the above c) Member of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, etc) d) Formally appointed representative of a non-At-Large ICANN group to a PDP, CCWG, Specific Review, etc) e) Leader of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, Specific Review)

*Note that this is ONLY in reference to ALS Representatives. Some WP members expressed concern if, for instance, an ALAC member help an influential role in another part of ICANN, but rules governing ALAC Members are FAR out of the scope of the WP. We did note that the ALAC might wish to have such a discussion at some point. 2. ALS Institutional Membership *This question concerns whether an entity that is an ALS may also be a member of some other part of ICANN (regardless of whether the representatives to each part of ICANN are the same or different people).

Again, there was little concern for an ALS being an non-voting INSTITUTIONAL member of some other part of ICANN. The discussion on whether dual voting is problematic was quite spirited and strong positions were taken on both sides. However, after a substantial discussion on what the actual harm was that we were trying to avoid, and in fact, the perceived harm of currently having nearly 40 ALSes with voting rights in both and At-Large RALO and the NCSG, there was a very strong consensus in the WP there was in fact no real harm.

Accordingly our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition related to an ALS being an institutional member of some other part of ICANN (such as the NCSG or IPC within the GNSO, or a member of the ccNSO), but such an overlapped membership must be declared in the ALS application and in the biennial report.

So in summary, in both cases, there was a strong consensus that although concerns had been expressed, we could not find any real harm in the current status quo, and that disclosure could address any perceived conflicts.

*I and the WP would appreciate comments, and in particular, those from people who believe that our recommendations are wrong (explaining why). * 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...) _______________________________________________ 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.

Thank you Alan for this lengthy exposition - I totally agree with the ALAC positions as you have described them. Holly

On Apr 20, 2020, at 2:40 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

This is a long message, but the issue is important. Please take the time to read it carefully. This particularly applies to current ALAC Members and RALO Leaders.

Over the past years, there have been many discussions about whether it is problematic to have both individuals and ALSes associated with At-Large to be members (or voting members) of other parts of the ICANN Community (and in particular, NCSG).

These issues have never been resolved, and although they have come up for discussion regularly, addressing them has always been deferred.

To the extent that these issues fall under the remit of the ALS-Mobilization Working Party (WP), they have been discussed at length.

We are in the process of finalizing our report on ALS Expectations and Criteria, and as such have tentatively finalized our recommendation related to these areas. I would like to present them to this group so that any comments can be brought back to the WP.

We looked at two areas: 1. Whether there is any problem with ALS representatives joining and participating in other parts of ICANN 2. Whether an organization that is an ALS can be an institutional member of some other part of ICANN

To set the stage, one should note: - we have MANY individuals associated with At-Large (including ALAC Members) who are members of NCSG and a few who are members of various other parts of the GNSO, ccNSO, GAC, SSAC, the Board and no doubt other parts of ICANN; - we have about 40 ALSes that are also institutional members of NCSG. - Other groups, particularly within the GNSO have rules that multiple memberships may exist, but only once can have vote-casting privileges (such as between the Registrar and Registry SGs, or the Business and Intellectual Property Constituencies). There also rules that prohibit multiple memberships in specific situations.

1. ALS Representatives

There was virtually no concern with an ALS Representative being a non-voting member of some other part of ICANN (presuming the concept of a non-voting member applies to that other group). ALS Reps may cast votes within RALOs (either based on their own views or directed by their ALS leadership or membership (we do NOT tell ALSes how to conduct their affairs). There was some concern about an ALS Rep doing so while also holding a vote in some other part of ICANN. However, there was a very strong consensus that the nature of votes within a RALO, and the impact that these votes have on substantive policy issues or the selection of individuals was not sufficiently large as to warrant rules prohibiting such involvement. The group did however strongly support full disclosure of any such overlaps.

According, our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition on an ALS Representative holding roles in other parts of ICANN (non-At-Large), but those roles comparable to those listed below must be formally declared.

a) Member of another constituent part of ICANN (AC/SO, sub-constituency) b) Leadership role in any of the above c) Member of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, etc) d) Formally appointed representative of a non-At-Large ICANN group to a PDP, CCWG, Specific Review, etc) e) Leader of a non-At-Large working group (such as GNSO PDP, CCWG, Specific Review)

Note that this is ONLY in reference to ALS Representatives. Some WP members expressed concern if, for instance, an ALAC member help an influential role in another part of ICANN, but rules governing ALAC Members are FAR out of the scope of the WP. We did note that the ALAC might wish to have such a discussion at some point.

2. ALS Institutional Membership

This question concerns whether an entity that is an ALS may also be a member of some other part of ICANN (regardless of whether the representatives to each part of ICANN are the same or different people).

Again, there was little concern for an ALS being an non-voting INSTITUTIONAL member of some other part of ICANN. The discussion on whether dual voting is problematic was quite spirited and strong positions were taken on both sides. However, after a substantial discussion on what the actual harm was that we were trying to avoid, and in fact, the perceived harm of currently having nearly 40 ALSes with voting rights in both and At-Large RALO and the NCSG, there was a very strong consensus in the WP there was in fact no real harm.

Accordingly our current recommendation reads:

There is no prohibition related to an ALS being an institutional member of some other part of ICANN (such as the NCSG or IPC within the GNSO, or a member of the ccNSO), but such an overlapped membership must be declared in the ALS application and in the biennial report.

So in summary, in both cases, there was a strong consensus that although concerns had been expressed, we could not find any real harm in the current status quo, and that disclosure could address any perceived conflicts.

I and the WP would appreciate comments, and in particular, those from people who believe that our recommendations are wrong (explaining why).

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...) _______________________________________________ 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.