- APAC-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS
by Jurisonline in Dec. 5, 2013

Dec. 5, 2013

Thanks for the update Satish. Please forward the copy of the same to me for my review and records. Also confirm whether the same is the final approved version and are you ok with the same? Rgds, Nirmol Sent from my Windows Phone ------------------------------ From: Satish Babu <director(a)icfoss.in> Sent: 30-11-2013 20:47 To: Jurisonline in <admin(a)jurisonline.in> Cc: Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa(a)gmail.com>; APRALO<apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>; METRICS <metrics.sc(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS Hi Nirmol On the first point, I have carried back a bunch of printed Hindi brochures with me from Buenos Aires. I can send them to you (or Heidi can send you some). I agree that it is important to communicate better amongst us. The next two meetings (Singapore and London) are both going to see the APRALO ALSes come together, so this is a good time to put things in order. satish On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 8:39 PM, Jurisonline in <admin(a)jurisonline.in>wrote: > I concur with Fouad, There was a resolution passed in the APRALO meeting > (in Beijing) to publish the APRALO brochure in Hindi. I even got the first > cut draft of the same on which me and other ALSes from India gave their > comments.... but thereafter inspite of my repeated reminders to APRALO > staff and members no action have been to taken to finalise the Hindi draft > of the brouchure till date. > > Also I have been advocating shifting the monthly calls of APRALO to weekend > (in order to allow us to be able to attend these calls more frequently, > since we are working professionals and it becomes difficult to focus on > APRALO during our regular working days), but no action has been taken on > the same till date. Unfortunately these calls get fixed as per the > convenience of limited few, who also run the agenda for the calls, thus a > very limited group dragging the entire agenda of APRALO. > > I am happy that this group now is looking into the practical aspects of > resolving inefficiencies in the group and I congratulate them on the same. > > Three cheers!!! > Regards > Nirmol K Agarwal > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Fouad Bajwa <fouadbajwa(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > I believe one of the most important metrics component should be built > > on the fact that if a member suggests something, how many of those > > suggestions were actually accepted and incorporated into the system. > > > > One small example is that I've proposed individual membership in the > > past during 2010, created the paperwork suggesting the policy reform > > in the APRALO articles, presented it and then silence. This would have > > enhanced participation, inclusion of more productive talent and people > > that are sensitive about ICANN and IG related issues. Such talent thus > > has to move under a narrower scope into the ncuc/ncsg and APRALO loses > > out. > > > > Somehow the belief that only groups can represent the rights of the > > users is a fantasy. For example, in the technical community and most > > in ISOC circles, most of the members in a recognized ALS are not > > actually CS or information rights activists but people with corporate > > day jobs and of companies that actually should fall under contracted > > parties ac/oc's in ICANN. > > > > The value that comes into such an organizational system are actually > > the members, the system itself cannot come up with ideas and transform > > the ideas into workable actions. > > > > Participation collapses when member ideas are not viewed as valuable > > input and organizations that don't believe in agility to change and > > adapt to round the clock innovation and improvements basically fall > > short on rationality for existence and support in the future. > > > > If the participation in meetings and tele-cons are an evaluative > > criteria for calculating value for money, something is seriously wrong > > with ICANN and the people who are attempting to address such issues by > > adopting such a weak and lame course of action. > > > > KPIs are measured against activities and participation in telecons and > > meetings are not such an input or expected outcome. > > > > The indicators can be established on a the basis of number of members > > present and number of comments, suggestions and recommendations > > received during any calls/meetings and the actions were taken on them. > > The second level would be number of policy comments requested by ICANN > > and the number of members that voted on them, the time taken to make > > comments or recommendations, total number of policy requests for > > comments and number of comments made to policy requests. > > > > Its actually a very simple and straightforward thing. List down all > > the things that ALAC and its members do. Against those activities a > > scorecard can be developed and benchmarked against other AC/OC work. > > > > I'll think more about this. > > > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 8:18 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim > > <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello everyone. > > > > > > I like Ali's input on metrics about leadership of Working Groups for > ALAC > > > members. I would also suggest co-chairing of WG between an ALAC Member > > and > > > an At-Large community member. This will help build collaborative skills > > and > > > capacity along the way. > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > Rinalia > > > On Nov 27, 2013 11:17 PM, "Maureen Hilyard" <hilyard(a)oyster.net.ck> > > wrote: > > > > > >> Thank you Ali. This breadth of feedback is very much appreciated. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Maureen > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> From: Ali AlMeshal [mailto:dralialmeshal@gmail.com] > > >> Sent: Wednesday, 27 November 2013 12:45 a.m. > > >> To: Maureen Hilyard > > >> Cc: Karaitiana Taiuru; APRALO; METRICS > > >> Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Good day Maureen, > > >> > > >> First of all we have always to but in mind as your correctly stated > > that > > >> this is a volunteer work from the members, but on the other hand I do > > agree > > >> that up to certain extent there should be a fair KPI’s in place to > > evaluate > > >> the performance of ALAC members. > > >> > > >> Also I am quite sure that selected or nominated ALAC members for these > > >> leadership positions were based on their knowledge , commitment and > > >> experience as well as high performance otherwise they will not be part > > of > > >> the team. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Hence measuring criteria would always be much clearer and effective > > if > > >> it > > >> is set for Quantitative factors rather than Qualitative once. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> So having said that then I would like to address the following: > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> o Attending meetings by it self is not a goal or objective therefore > > it > > >> can not be part of the measuring criteria independently. > > >> > > >> o Also participation and contribution to the meeting discussion can > > not > > >> be > > >> evaluated as a performance measure > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Thereafter to have a process in place that gives an indication of > the > > >> member performance I would suggest the following > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> o ALAC members should be assigned to Chair a WG’s > > >> > > >> § With this type of assignment the member will logically be > accountable > > >> and > > >> responsible of a set deliverables that he/she have to achieve, and > this > > >> can > > >> be measured and evaluated for the following set of KPI’s > > >> > > >> · Time to deliver > > >> > > >> · Commitment > > >> > > >> · Team working > > >> > > >> · Developing others (member of the group) > > >> > > >> · Others > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> o ALAC members and chair of RALO’s jointly should be responsible > for > > >> engaging the ALS’s in work and activities related to the rejoin at > least > > >> and > > >> should provide a monthly call report on this. > > >> > > >> § This is different activity from the RALO monthly call; this should > be > > >> done separately to reach out the ALS’s through a pre-plan agenda and > > time > > >> frame. > > >> > > >> § The objective is to get in touch with ALS’s members outside the > > >> official > > >> call and tries to understand their needs and requirements and also > will > > be > > >> a > > >> good tool maybe to get them engage in if they are not active. So this > is > > >> more of OUTREACH on a small scale and more of direct communication. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> Should you need any clarification then please let me know by email or > a > > >> call, I will be more than happy to discuss. > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Maureen Hilyard < > hilyard(a)oyster.net.ck > > > > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >> Thank you KT for your comments and suggestions. These are all very > > helpful. > > >> > > >> Regards > > >> Maureen > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: apac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > >> > > >> Karaitiana Taiuru > > >> Sent: Monday, 25 November 2013 12:12 p.m. > > >> To: 'APRALO' > > >> Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > >> > > >> These are my thoughts based on not been an ALAC member (nor do I have > > time > > >> to). > > >> > > >> I would support a more closer monitoring approach to the ALAC > > performance > > >> review and would like to see the evaluations distributed to the > relevant > > >> RALO's as we are the ones who nominate and put our trust in our > > >> representatives to provide our views and then to report back to us. > > >> > > >> I would expect that participation in all meetings, emails and Work > > Groups > > >> would be at the very minimum 90%. There are so many issues at present > it > > >> would be hard not to have a voice at a meeting. > > >> > > >> Saying this, I would also expect that any new ALAC appointments are > > >> mentored > > >> and giving an appropriate transition period and were made to feel > > >> comfortable to ask for help. Some cultural and language barriers may > > also > > >> exist and should be considered. > > >> > > >> If people are under-performing, then perhaps a mechanism of someone > > talking > > >> to them in a non threating manner to see if there is any assistance > > >> required > > >> etc. > > >> > > >> Perhaps too, some way of recognition for the long hours and dedication > > may > > >> also be a motivation. This is likely to be more of a RALO initiative > > >> though. > > >> > > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: apac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > Maureen > > >> Hilyard > > >> Sent: Sunday, 24 November 2013 5:52 p.m. > > >> To: APRALO > > >> Subject: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > >> > > >> APRALO colleagues > > >> > > >> As Siranush had informed you already, I am on a working group (headed > by > > >> Cheryl Langdon-Orr) that is looking at measuring the performance of > > ALAC > > >> members (as expected in the ALAC Rules of Procedure). We are later to > be > > >> looking at ALSes and RALOs. > > >> > > >> It is an extremely difficult thing to do when: > > >> * the people in these positions are volunteers who have offered to do > > this > > >> work out of the goodness of their hearts - how do you measure their > > >> contribution to a task that has been set? > > >> * the Board and Management are becoming more vocal about getting value > > for > > >> money spent within the system - it costs a lot of money to bring the > > >> committees of the ICANN system together for each meeting. three times > a > > >> year. They rightfully want to know that they are getting their > money's > > >> worth. > > >> * it is very difficult to ascertain what METRICS are appropriate to > > measure > > >> each particular type of performance (attendance? contribution? value > of > > >> contribution? others?) > > >> > > >> As ALSes you elect your APRALO representatives on the ALAC (me and > > Holly) > > >> and although Raf has been appointed to the ALAC as and APRALO NOMCOM > > >> candidate - the expectations should be the same. > > >> > > >> Therefore I'd really like to hear not only about WHAT performance > > criteria > > >> should be evaluated but also HOW it might be appropriately measured. I > > >> would > > >> like to use the advice of the ALSes to put together an evaluative > > process > > >> which could help us evaluate all the groups we have been tasked to > > >> evaluate. > > >> > > >> This is what we are looking at, at the moment: > > >> > > >> 1. Do ALAC members attend all the meetings they should? Some attend > the > > >> face to face meetings, but not the online meetings. ICANN is not > > looking at > > >> these candidates very favourably. > > >> > > >> 2. Do ALAC members who attend the meetings actually contribute > anything > > to > > >> the meetings? Some attend meetings but they don't say anything - what > > value > > >> do they give? Some log into teleconference meetings, but because they > > don't > > >> contribute anything, it is difficult to know whether they actually > > >> listening?) > > >> > > >> 3. Do ALAC members participate on working groups? We have lots of > > members > > >> who volunteer for a working group, and never turn up for meetings to > do > > the > > >> work. Its the same people every time doing the work . > > >> > > >> There may be other questions you may want to ask. Please do... > > >> > > >> Very importantly, HOW can we more effectively evaluate performance - > > what > > >> do > > >> you use in your workplace? > > >> > > >> Let me know.. I'd love to hear from you. > > >> > > >> Maureen > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> APAC-Discuss mailing list > > >> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > >> > > >> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> APAC-Discuss mailing list > > >> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > >> > > >> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> APAC-Discuss mailing list > > >> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > >> > > >> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Thanks > > >> > > >> Ali AlMeshal > > >> > > >> Bahrain Internet Society - BIS > > >> > > >> Board Member & Director of Strategic Alliances > > >> > > >> Professional Public speaker in ICT and e-Business > > >> > > >> Payment Industry Expert Advisor > > >> > > >> Mobile: +973 39440025 > > >> > > >> Skype: alialmeshal > > >> > > >> email: dralialmeshal(a)gmail.com > > >> > > >> ali.almeshal(a)bis.org.bh > > >> > > >> www.bis.org.bh <http://www.bis.org.bh/> > > >> > > >> Twitter :@internetBH > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> APAC-Discuss mailing list > > >> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > >> > > >> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > > > > -- > > Regards. > > -------------------------- > > Fouad Bajwa > > ICT4D and Internet Governance Advisor > > My Blog: Internet's Governance: http://internetsgovernance.blogspot.com/ > > Follow my Tweets: http://twitter.com/fouadbajwa > > _______________________________________________ > > APAC-Discuss mailing list > > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > > -- > CAUTION: PLEASE READ OUR "TERMS OF USE" BEFORE RELYING UPON ANY ADVISE > TENDERED HEREIN. NOTE THE ADVISE GIVEN HEREIN SHALL NOT BE ADMISSIBLE IN > ANY COURT OF LAW IN INDIA OR ABROAD AND IS MERELY IN THE NATURE OF A > PERSONAL OPINION AND DONOT HAVE ANY STATUTORY VALUE. > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >

2 1

Fwd: Re: Re: ccTLD Revocation
by Rinalia Abdul Rahim Dec. 5, 2013

Dec. 5, 2013

Dear Keith, Please have a look at Eduardo's response (forwarded below), which is guided by a real case. Can you kindly venture into the shades of nuance to address the situation that he has highlighted? I think this discussion will be useful for the ALAC in considering its input on revocation. Best regards, Rinalia ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Eduardo Diaz" <eduardodiazrivera(a)gmail.com> Date: Dec 2, 2013 7:12 AM Subject: Re: Re: [APAC-Discuss] ccTLD Revocation To: "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> Cc: Rinalia: > > Governments may be treated as another stakeholder as far as the RFC-1591 > is concerned but a government with a mandate, e.g. a "local law", to > revocate, should have more weight and standing than any other stakeholder. > So the question still stands: if a government requests a revocation without > reaching a consent with the ccTLD manager, will the IANA operator send it > back to be resolved locally? If so, the ccTLD manager has the last saying > in the whole process. The applicability of "local law" in the RFC 1591 > should be clearly interpreted by the framework to cover cases like these. > > -ed > > > On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 2:15 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim < > rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ed, >> >> what do you think? >> >> Rinalia >> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >> From: "Keith Davidson" <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz> >> Date: Nov 22, 2013 3:26 AM >> Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] ccTLD Revocation >> To: "Rinalia Abdul Rahim" <rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com> >> Cc: "apralo" <apac-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "ALAC Working List" >> <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> >> Hi Rinalia, all, >> >> We have discussed the concept of Governments vs other parties who seek a >> revocation, and see no reason to differentiate governments from any other >> stakeholder group in this regard. In terms of the policies outlined in >> RFC1591, governments are not accorded any special status, but references >> are made to the applicability of "local law" instead. >> >> The shades of nuance of the difference, or sameness of this could take >> quite some debate - which I am happy to entertain if you think it useful. >> >> Cheers >> >> Keith >> >> >> On 22/11/2013 6:55 a.m., Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: >> >>> Keith, >>> >>> Thank you for jumping in on this issue. Can you clarify on whether the >>> WG discussed in any way how revocation should be handled if it is >>> requested by governments and if there are special criteria that would >>> apply in such cases? >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rinalia >>> >>> On Nov 22, 2013 1:46 AM, "Keith Davidson" <keith(a)internetnz.net.nz >>> <mailto:keith@internetnz.net.nz>> wrote: >>> >>> Just as an aside, I am the Chair of the Working Group that drafted >>> the Revocation document as part of the overall Framework of >>> Interpretation working group in ICANN, so if there are issues or >>> clarifications required on this, I would be happy to discuss with >>> folks on this list. >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Keith >>> >>> On 22/11/2013 2:09 a.m., Rinalia Abdul Rahim wrote: >>> >>> Dear Sala, >>> >>> There is time for input, but the urgency level must be >>> maintained as the >>> ALAC is scheduled to vote on the statement on 12th December. I >>> recognize >>> that the issue affects many interested parties, which is why I >>> sent out a >>> second call for comments recently. I look forward to more input >>> on the >>> important topic of revocation from the community with Maureen's >>> mobilization and coordination. >>> >>> Thank you for your help. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rinalia >>> >>> On Nov 21, 2013 8:48 PM, "Sala T" <sala(a)pasifikanexus.nu >>> <mailto:sala@pasifikanexus.nu>> wrote: >>> >>> Dear Rinalia, >>> >>> Thank you for this. Since this first came out, I had sent it >>> to the region >>> and also to the Regulators, ccTLD managers and Government >>> Policy makers. I >>> had a meeting with Pacific Regional Regulators Resource >>> Center which is a >>> unit comprising all the Regulators and Policy makers. Some >>> of them are also >>> members of ALSes in the Pacific. >>> >>> There was overwhelming response that they were busy with >>> Plenipotentiary >>> preparations. >>> >>> I will be having another meeting with some of them for the >>> purpose of >>> feeding into the process and hopefully by crowd-sourcing >>> where there are >>> geographical challenges. I will work with Maureen to feed >>> this into the >>> wiki etc. This may involve having a specific webinar and >>> will brief Maureen >>> and get her to take the lead on this as she is ALAC and >>> ccNSO liaison. >>> >>> Please give us time to put submissions in. >>> >>> Best Regards, >>> Sala >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> >>> On Nov 19, 2013, at 11:03 AM, Rinalia Abdul Rahim < >>> >>> rinalia.abdulrahim(a)gmail.com >>> <mailto:rinalia.abdulrahim@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> Dear At-Large Colleagues, >>> >>> The ALAC is preparing a statement on the topic of ccTLD >>> "revocation", >>> >>> which >>> >>> refers to a process where the IANA Operator rescinds the >>> responsibility >>> >>> for >>> >>> the management of a ccTLD from the manager. In such a >>> situation, a >>> >>> country >>> >>> code Top Level Domain will be re-delegated without the >>> consent of the >>> incumbent ccTLD manager in cases where there are >>> “persistent problems >>> >>> with >>> >>> the operations of the domain” and where there continues >>> to be >>> >>> “substantial >>> >>> misbehavior” on the part of ccTLD managers despite the >>> IANA Operator’s >>> >>> best >>> >>> efforts to stop the misconduct. >>> >>> A draft statement has been prepared and is available for >>> your >>> >>> input/comment >>> >>> on the following wikipage: >>> https://community.icann.org/__ >>> pages/viewpage.action?pageId=__43980716 >>> >>> <https://community.icann.org/ >>> pages/viewpage.action?pageId=43980716> >>> >>> If you have thoughts or opinions on this topic, please >>> do provide your >>> input/comments on the wikipage. >>> >>> Thank you. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> >>> Rinalia >>> _________________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.__icann.org >>> <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.__ >>> org/mailman/listinfo/apac-__discuss >>> >>> <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac- >>> discuss> >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >>> >>> _________________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.__icann.org >>> <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.__org/mailman/listinfo/apac-__discuss >>> <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss> >>> >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >>> _________________________________________________ >>> APAC-Discuss mailing list >>> APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.__icann.org >>> <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.__org/mailman/listinfo/apac-__discuss >>> >>> <https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss> >>> >>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org >>> >>> > > > -- > *NOTICE:* This email may contain information which is confidential and/or > subject to legal privilege, and is intended for the use of the named > addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, you must not use, > disclose or copy any part of this email. If you have received this email by > mistake, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately. >

5 6

REMINDER: Meeting Invitation: APRALO Singapore Showcase OC on Wednesday 4th December at 06:00 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

Dear all, The first APRALO Singapore Showcase OC meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 4th December 2013 at 0600 UTC. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/njy6x7s Agenda (to be created) and call details can be found : https://community.icann.org/x/LSmfAg Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/apralo Conference ID 1638 http://adigo.com/icann/ If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff with your preferred number at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. Thank you, Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

Meeting invitation/ APRALO Monthly December meeting - 18 December at 0600 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

Dear All, Due to the holiday season, the December APRALO teleconference is scheduled for Wednesday 18 December 2013 at 0600 UTC. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/kw5cv3d The agenda (to be updated) and call details can be found at: https://community.icann.org/x/3CmfAg Adobe Connect Room: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/apralo APRALO wiki workspace: https://community.icann.org/x/4ZMi If you are unable to attend the call please send an email indicating your absence and we will note this information on the agenda. If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff at:staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. Thank you. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org> One World, One Internet

2 2

APRALO meeting
by Holly Raiche Dec. 3, 2013

Dec. 3, 2013

Hi Everyone The list of meetings has the APRALO meeting on Thursday at 4.30am Sydney time. Sorry to be an apology, but I have had a meeting today at 3.00am and tomorrow at 0200 and would like the rest of the week without such early mornings. (particularly since Thursday for me is a very busy day. So my apology in advance. And a plea - could we please get the APRALO call back to a time better suited to the region Thanks Holly

1 0

Re: [APAC-Discuss] [Metrics.SC] METRICS
by Ali AlMeshal Dec. 2, 2013

Dec. 2, 2013

Thank you Tijani for your input. I can see that in principle you are agreeing with me in some of the below if it is not all. To comment on your feedback please allow me to crystallize my below views. If you may notice that I have listed my points below in logical sequence , staring from what is on the table as a points to what do I see as a proposal. My first point: - “Attending meetings by itself is not a goal or objective therefore it cannot be part of the measuring criteria independently.” - Also participation and contribution to the meeting discussion cannot be evaluated as a performance measure *Therefore to make it part of the **criterion I suggested this* - ALAC members should be assigned to Chair a WG’s § With this type of assignment the member will logically be accountable and responsible of a set deliverables that he/she have to achieve, and this can be measured and evaluated for the following set of KPI’s · Time to deliver · Commitment · Team working · Developing others (member of the group) · Others * So by doing the above we are fulfilling the attending and contribution part of the criteria , but the major different hear is that the member is not attending or participating for the sack of showing up or to record his attendees only , No he is attending to update , discuss and participate and give feedback on action item that he is in-charge of and so on.* My Second point: - ALAC members and chair of RALO’s jointly should be responsible for engaging the ALS’s in work and activities related to the rejoin at least and should provide a monthly call report on this. § This is different activity from the RALO monthly call; this should be done separately to reach out the ALS’s through a pre-plan agenda and time frame. § The objective is to get in touch with ALS’s members outside the official call and tries to understand their needs and requirements and also will be a good tool maybe to get them engage in if they are not active. So this is more of OUTREACH on a small scale and more of direct communication. · *On the assumption that this point is clear, then for the parameter, what I have thought about for the time being is the Call Report that need to be presented in the monthly call meeting. The call report for example should look like * Date ALS Name Contact Person Comments and feedback 12/12/12 Bahrain Internet Society Ali AlMeshal 1 – 2 – 3 - 01/01/13 xxxxx xxxxx Should you or any other have more thoughts of this then it would be very much helpful to enrich this fruitful discussion. Hope I manage to answer and clarify your enquiries and doubts . Thanks On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 1:15 AM, Tijani BENJEMAA <tijani.benjemaa(a)topnet.tn>wrote: > Dear Ali, > > > > Thank you very much for your comments > > > > · Attending meetings by itself is not a goal or objective therefore > it can not be part of the measuring criteria independently. > > Ali, ALAC can’t decide on anything without quorum, and members who don’t > attend the ALAC meetings may break its functioning. Also, I may agree with > you that attending is not a goal and shouldn’t be part of the criteria, but > the attendance is absolutely necessary for any contribution during the > meeting/call. It’s the elementary duty for the ALAC members. Attendance is > proposed as one of the metrics element > > > > · Also participation and contribution to the meeting discussion can > not be evaluated as a performance measure > > If the participation and contribution to the ALAC meetings is not > considered as a performance criterion, that means that all the ALAC members > can decide not meet at all and they can be considered as having good > performance. > > > Thereafter to have a process in place that gives an indication of the > member performance I would suggest the following > > o ALAC members should be assigned to Chair a WG’s > > This is another criterion listed in the proposal > > > o ALAC members and chair of RALO’s jointly should be responsible for > engaging the ALS’s in work and activities related to the rejoin at least > and should provide a monthly call report on this. > > What are the parameters of measurement you propose for this? > > > > Thank you again for your contribution > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > *Tijani BEN JEMAA* > > Executive Director > > Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*) > > Phone: + 216 41 649 605 > > Mobile: + 216 98 330 114 > > Fax: + 216 70 853 376 > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: Ali AlMeshal [mailto:dralialmeshal@gmail.com] > Sent: Wednesday, 27 November 2013 12:45 a.m. > To: Maureen Hilyard > Cc: Karaitiana Taiuru; APRALO; METRICS > Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > > > Good day Maureen, > > First of all we have always to but in mind as your correctly stated that > this is a volunteer work from the members, but on the other hand I do agree > that up to certain extent there should be a fair KPI’s in place to evaluate > the performance of ALAC members. > > Also I am quite sure that selected or nominated ALAC members for these > leadership positions were based on their knowledge , commitment and > experience as well as high performance otherwise they will not be part of > the team. > > > > Hence measuring criteria would always be much clearer and effective if > it > is set for Quantitative factors rather than Qualitative once. > > > > So having said that then I would like to address the following: > > > > o Attending meetings by it self is not a goal or objective therefore it > can not be part of the measuring criteria independently. > > o Also participation and contribution to the meeting discussion can not > be > evaluated as a performance measure > > > > Thereafter to have a process in place that gives an indication of the > member performance I would suggest the following > > > > o ALAC members should be assigned to Chair a WG’s > > § With this type of assignment the member will logically be accountable > and > responsible of a set deliverables that he/she have to achieve, and this > can > be measured and evaluated for the following set of KPI’s > > · Time to deliver > > · Commitment > > · Team working > > · Developing others (member of the group) > > · Others > > > > o ALAC members and chair of RALO’s jointly should be responsible for > engaging the ALS’s in work and activities related to the rejoin at least > and > should provide a monthly call report on this. > > § This is different activity from the RALO monthly call; this should be > done separately to reach out the ALS’s through a pre-plan agenda and time > frame. > > § The objective is to get in touch with ALS’s members outside the > official > call and tries to understand their needs and requirements and also will be > a > good tool maybe to get them engage in if they are not active. So this is > more of OUTREACH on a small scale and more of direct communication. > > > > Should you need any clarification then please let me know by email or a > call, I will be more than happy to discuss. > > > > On Tue, Nov 26, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Maureen Hilyard <hilyard(a)oyster.net.ck> > wrote: > > Thank you KT for your comments and suggestions. These are all very helpful. > > Regards > Maureen > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: apac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of > > Karaitiana Taiuru > Sent: Monday, 25 November 2013 12:12 p.m. > To: 'APRALO' > Subject: Re: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > These are my thoughts based on not been an ALAC member (nor do I have time > to). > > I would support a more closer monitoring approach to the ALAC performance > review and would like to see the evaluations distributed to the relevant > RALO's as we are the ones who nominate and put our trust in our > representatives to provide our views and then to report back to us. > > I would expect that participation in all meetings, emails and Work Groups > would be at the very minimum 90%. There are so many issues at present it > would be hard not to have a voice at a meeting. > > Saying this, I would also expect that any new ALAC appointments are > mentored > and giving an appropriate transition period and were made to feel > comfortable to ask for help. Some cultural and language barriers may also > exist and should be considered. > > If people are under-performing, then perhaps a mechanism of someone talking > to them in a non threating manner to see if there is any assistance > required > etc. > > Perhaps too, some way of recognition for the long hours and dedication may > also be a motivation. This is likely to be more of a RALO initiative > though. > > -----Original Message----- > From: apac-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:apac-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Maureen > Hilyard > Sent: Sunday, 24 November 2013 5:52 p.m. > To: APRALO > Subject: [APAC-Discuss] METRICS > > APRALO colleagues > > As Siranush had informed you already, I am on a working group (headed by > Cheryl Langdon-Orr) that is looking at measuring the performance of ALAC > members (as expected in the ALAC Rules of Procedure). We are later to be > looking at ALSes and RALOs. > > It is an extremely difficult thing to do when: > * the people in these positions are volunteers who have offered to do this > work out of the goodness of their hearts - how do you measure their > contribution to a task that has been set? > * the Board and Management are becoming more vocal about getting value for > money spent within the system - it costs a lot of money to bring the > committees of the ICANN system together for each meeting. three times a > year. They rightfully want to know that they are getting their money's > worth. > * it is very difficult to ascertain what METRICS are appropriate to measure > each particular type of performance (attendance? contribution? value of > contribution? others?) > > As ALSes you elect your APRALO representatives on the ALAC (me and Holly) > and although Raf has been appointed to the ALAC as and APRALO NOMCOM > candidate - the expectations should be the same. > > Therefore I'd really like to hear not only about WHAT performance criteria > should be evaluated but also HOW it might be appropriately measured. I > would > like to use the advice of the ALSes to put together an evaluative process > which could help us evaluate all the groups we have been tasked to > evaluate. > > This is what we are looking at, at the moment: > > 1. Do ALAC members attend all the meetings they should? Some attend the > face to face meetings, but not the online meetings. ICANN is not looking at > these candidates very favourably. > > 2. Do ALAC members who attend the meetings actually contribute anything to > the meetings? Some attend meetings but they don't say anything - what value > do they give? Some log into teleconference meetings, but because they don't > contribute anything, it is difficult to know whether they actually > listening?) > > 3. Do ALAC members participate on working groups? We have lots of members > who volunteer for a working group, and never turn up for meetings to do the > work. Its the same people every time doing the work . > > There may be other questions you may want to ask. Please do... > > Very importantly, HOW can we more effectively evaluate performance - what > do > you use in your workplace? > > Let me know.. I'd love to hear from you. > > Maureen > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > > > > > -- > > Thanks > > Ali AlMeshal > > Bahrain Internet Society - BIS > > Board Member & Director of Strategic Alliances > > Professional Public speaker in ICT and e-Business > > Payment Industry Expert Advisor > > Mobile: +973 39440025 > > Skype: alialmeshal > > email: dralialmeshal(a)gmail.com > > ali.almeshal(a)bis.org.bh > > www.bis.org.bh <http://www.bis.org.bh/> > > Twitter :@internetBH > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > APAC-Discuss mailing list > APAC-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss > > Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org > -- Thanks Ali AlMeshal Bahrain Internet Society - BIS Board Member & Director of Strategic Alliances Professional Public speaker in ICT and e-Business Payment Industry Expert Advisor Mobile: +973 39440025 Skype: alialmeshal email: dralialmeshal(a)gmail.com ali.almeshal(a)bis.org.bh www.bis.org.bh Twitter :@internetBH

1 0

Meeting Invitation: APRALO Singapore Showcase OC on Wednesday 4th December at 06:00 UTC
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 29, 2013

Nov. 29, 2013

Dear all, The first APRALO Singapore Showcase OC meeting is scheduled for Wednesday 4th December 2013 at 0600 UTC. For other times: http://tinyurl.com/njy6x7s Agenda (to be created) and call details can be found : https://community.icann.org/x/LSmfAg Adobe Connect: http://icann.adobeconnect.com/apralo Conference ID 1638 http://adigo.com/icann/ If you require a dial-out please contact At-Large staff with your preferred number at: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>. Thank you, Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>

1 0

Call for Volunteers GNSO Policy Translation and Transliteration PDP Working Group
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 27, 2013

Nov. 27, 2013

Call for Volunteers GNSO Policy Translation and Transliteration PDP Working Group In Brief The Generic Names Supporting Organization (GNSO) Council is seeking volunteers to serve on the PDP Working Group (WG) on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information. This WG is expected to make recommendations to the GNSO Council on whether it is desirable to translate or transliterate contact information. In this context, translation is the process of conveying the meaning of text from on language into another; transliteration is the process of representing the characters of one alphabetical or syllabic system of writing by the characters of another, conversion alphabet. Introductory Webinar To provide potential volunteers with an idea of the PDP Process including Working Group procedures and also some background information on the WG's substantive issues, an Introductory Webinar will be held at the following times: Tuesday 10 December 2013, 12.00-13.00UTC - local times: http://tinyurl.com/m2suev5 Wednesday 11 December 2013, 18.00-19.00UTC - local times http://tinyurl.com/kyk5lej To join the webinar please RVSP to gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org> First meeting If you are interested in joining the Working Group, please contact gnso-secs(a)icann.org<mailto:gnso-secs@icann.org>. The first meeting of the Working Group is currently foreseen to take place in the week of 16 December - a doodle poll will be send out the week prior to determine a convenient meeting time. Background * Following the Recommendations of the Final Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/ird/final-report-ird-wg-07may12-en.pdf> of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group, a Final Issue Report<http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/gtlds/transliteration-contact-final-21mar13…> on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information was submitted to the GNSO Council on 21 March 2013 * GNSO Council's initiated<https://community.icann.org/display/gnsocouncilmeetings/Motions+13+June+2013> a Policy Development Process (PDP) on the translation and transliteration of contact information on 13 June 2013; Drafting Team was formed and Charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/transliteration-contact-charter-06nov13-en.…> submitted to GNSO Council and approved<http://gnso.icann.org/en/group-activities/calendar#nov> on 20 November 2013. * As part of its deliberations on this issue, Charter stipulates several questions for the PDP WG to consider, including (but not limited to): - Whether it is desirable to translate contact information to a single common language or transliterate contact information to a single common script. - Who should decide who should bear the burden translating contact information to a single common language or transliterating contact information to a single common script. * For more detailed, consult the WG's Charter<http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/transliteration-contact-charter-06nov13-en.…> and the GNSO Policy Development Process<http://gnso.icann.org/en/node/31379/> * Note GNSO Council also requested ICANN to commission a study on the commercial feasibility of translation or transliteration systems for internationalized contact data, which is expected to be completed in time to help inform the PDP Working Group in its deliberations. Relevant Documents * Charter Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information PDP Working Group (WG) Charter - http://gnso.icann.org/en/drafts/transliteration-contact-charter-06nov13-en.… * Final Issue Report on Translation and Transliteration of Contact Information (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/gtlds/transliteration-contact-final-21mar13…) * Final Report of the Internationalized Registration Data Working Group (http://gnso.icann.org/en/issues/ird/final-report-ird-wg-07may12-en.pdf) * GNSO Working Group Guidelines, including charter guidelines (http://gnso.icann.org/council/annex-1-gnso-wg-guidelines-08apr11-en.pdf)

1 0

CALL FOR EXPRESSIONS OF INTEREST for the Board Director Selected by At-Large now open through 26 December 2013
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 27, 2013

Nov. 27, 2013

Dear All, On behalf of Roberto Gaetano, Chair of the Board Candidate Evaluation Committee (BCEC), please find attached the Call for Expressions of Interest for the Board Director selected by At-Large (in English, French and Spanish). The document contains the link for the online application. Applications will be accepted between 26 November and 26 December 2013 at 23:59 UTC. The Board Director occupying Seat 15 will join the ICANN Board at the conclusion of 2014 ICANN Annual General Meeting, in October 2014. Regards, Heidi Ullrich, Silvia Vivanco, Matt Ashtiani, Gisella Gruber, Nathalie Peregrine and Julia Charvolen ICANN Policy Staff in support of ALAC E-mail: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org<mailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org%3cmailto:staff@atlarge.icann.org>>

2 1

UPDATED DOODLE POLL: Singapore Showcase OC ICANN 49
by ICANN At-Large Staff Nov. 26, 2013

Nov. 26, 2013

Dear all, Please be so kind as to complete the UPDATED Doodle poll to which the date of the 9th of December has been added in order to schedule the next Singapore Showcase Organizing Committee call: http://doodle.com/6fsfarusgxss5d3w Thank you Kind regards Nathalie ------------------------- Nathalie Peregrine For At-Large Staff Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Email: nathalie.peregrine(a)icann.org<mailto:nathalie.peregrine@icann.org> Skype ID: nathalie.peregrine.icann

1 0