Satish, I strongly agree on all counts. Alan -- Sent from my mobile. Please excuse brevity and typos. On December 3, 2017 1:55:34 AM EST, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote:

There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of, *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large Review:

1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy processes in RALOs and At-Large.

2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes

3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and not "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also because we often have no other means of verification

4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly.

We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.

satish

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

All good questions.

I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?

Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in ICANN processes.

Alan

At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that says that they officially do not belong to an ALS?

This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are individual members not affiliated to any organisation.

I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN, Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual members who represent the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions, APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of the individual members we currently have on our list How do we deregister them?

I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual member does not make sense to me.

M .

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca

...

wrote: One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort involved vs the benefits and risks.

Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.

In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.

Alan

At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST.

It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India.

Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on individuals in the region; I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But what a hassle. But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria, expectations and metrics. Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a wiki space for us. Maureen

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST. It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India. Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work

but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks Rajnesh. The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing an example.

satish On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh < rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.

Raj

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an individual member? He should already be involved.

M :)

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com > wrote: Hi All, I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards, Afifa On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff there are some with a N/A, please help get that information * Do they allow individual members?Yes Institutional members? N/A * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees (3) Audit Committee (5) in Board of Directors (35) other membersâ€

* Can individual members assume leadership positions?

N/A Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :) Thanks so much! Pavan

On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:

* Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIj w3LAdbzOGXCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ ARFWi4WxLGqU3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/ a9j76W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAK m9T8aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Nadira has a Valid point, as in most cases the ALSs leaders have very limited engagement and there are very few activities happening in context of members. ______________________ *Shreedeep Rayamajhi * *ICT4D Consultant | Editor Rayznews Founder Learn Internet Governance * [image: Professionally Connect with SR] <https://np.linkedin.com/in/shreedeeprayamajhi> +1(301)485-9395(US) *DISCLAIMER:* This message is intended only for the recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this information is strictly prohibited. On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Satish, Regarding to point 4. "4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly."

Many of the ALSes are run by a leadership team who may have no activities to engage their ordinary members. Here I come back to the discussion point on what is the criteria of making sure that a certified ALS is an active ALS as they are expected to perform certain activities related to ICANN that comply to RALO requirements in engaging both their own community and their wider community? If the said ALS don't do that then a potential good members of such ALS will be of disadvantage. Then if this potential member applied to be as individual member in APRALO if they already active in ICANN WGs, are RALOs ready to accept their application? This leads to the importance of documentation by ALS activities on regular or even annual basis on their wiki space as part of basic requirements to ALS. Not satisfying this basic requirement hints to their lack of seriousness.

Best, Nadira

On Dec 3, 2017 08:56, "Satish Babu" <sb@inapp.com> wrote:

There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of, *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large Review:

1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy processes in RALOs and At-Large.

2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes

3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and not "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also because we often have no other means of verification

4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly.

We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.

satish

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

All good questions.

I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?

Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in ICANN processes.

Alan

At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that says that they officially do not belong to an ALS?

This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are individual members not affiliated to any organisation.

I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN, Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual members who represent the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions, APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of the individual members we currently have on our list How do we deregister them?

I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual member does not make sense to me.

M .

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca

...

wrote: One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort involved vs the benefits and risks.

Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.

In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.

Alan

At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST.

It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India.

Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on individuals in the region; I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But what a hassle. But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria, expectations and metrics. Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a wiki space for us. Maureen

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST. It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India. Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work

but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks Rajnesh. The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing an example.

satish On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh < rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.

Raj

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an individual member? He should already be involved.

M :)

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com > wrote: Hi All, I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards, Afifa On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff there are some with a N/A, please help get that information * Do they allow individual members?Yes Institutional members? N/A * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees (3) Audit Committee (5) in Board of Directors (35) other membersâ€

* Can individual members assume leadership positions?

N/A Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :) Thanks so much! Pavan

On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:

* Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.or g/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOG XCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGq U3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j7 6W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8 aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Dear Nadira and all,

ALSes become active and inactive for a number of reasons, the most
prominent of which is routine changes in leadership (for instance, ALSes
whose leaders are elected each year).

During the GA Debrief Session, ALS representatives discussed a 4-tiered
approach to engaging with APRALO. The minimal (Tier 1) engagement was
informational, where routine policy information from ICANN At-Large and
other sources would be shared with all members of the ALS, thereby enabling
interested members to be directly engaged.

While we expect member ALSes to be engaged at least at this level, the
truth is that the situation is somewhat dynamic, and ALSes may drift in and
out of the "active" status based on the interests of their leadership. We
will have to collect and interpret metrics over a period of time before we
can take action (such as decertification) based on them.

It would interesting to also consider metrics that track internal IG
activities within the ALS (in addition to participation in APRALO/ICANN
calls and processes).

In summary, our expectation is that if an ALS cannot engage fully with
At-Large activities (or the ALS leaders are not interested), it still
creates an enabling environment for those of its members who are interested
to participate.

The ICANN Board decisions on the implementation plan of the At-Large Review
(expected shortly) will provide us with an opportunity to revisit and
possibly revise some of these assumptions and rules.








satish



On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 3:35 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>
wrote:

> A very valid observation... which is why there was a disconnect with some
> ALSes and identifying who should come to the General Assembly.  We had
> people attending whom we see very little, if at all, in our At-Large
> activities.
>
> But I have also said before that because of the nature of volunteerism
> among NGOs, especially in developing countries, there is often a lack of
> continuity of hierarchy of an NGO which in many cases is a contracted
> person who is only in the country for a limited time, and when their term
> is up, the new  manager, may get assigned a role that he/she may know
> nothing about, yet there may be members of  that ALS who actually are
> engaged - but they don't get the communications except for their working
> group emails, because these will go to the management. We really need to
> fix up that anomoly... somehow
>
> So maybe, once an ALS is registered, then we simply deal with those
> members who are interested and active whom we will be able to identify via
> our metrics and establish as the first and second contacts for any
> communications. .
>
> Now, if THEY don't deliver, then, after investigating why the change in
> interaction, the ALS will then head towards the deregistration process..
> It means that staff are going to have a greater monitoring role managing
> the metrics.  The Technology Task Force will be required to devise some
> systems for us to help us keep tabs on our members (ALS and individuals).
> Now that Dev is no longer active, who is our back-up technology whiz??
>
> M
>
> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 10:50 PM, Shreedeep Rayamajhi <weaker41@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Nadira has a Valid point, as in most cases the ALSs leaders have very
>> limited engagement and there are very few activities happening in context
>> of members.
>>
>>
>>
>> ______________________
>> *Shreedeep Rayamajhi *
>>
>>
>> *ICT4D Consultant | Editor Rayznews Founder Learn Internet Governance *
>> [image: Professionally Connect with SR]
>> <https://np.linkedin.com/in/shreedeeprayamajhi>
>> +1(301)485-9395 <+1%20301-485-9395>(US)
>>
>>
>> *DISCLAIMER:* This message is intended only for the recipient. If you
>> are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying,
>> distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this
>> information is strictly prohibited.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:28 PM, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Satish,
>>> Regarding to point 4.
>>> "4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as
>>> individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes.
>>> It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO
>>> levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly."
>>>
>>> Many of the ALSes are run by a leadership team who may have no
>>> activities to engage their ordinary members.
>>> Here I come back to the discussion point on what is the criteria of
>>> making sure that a certified ALS is an active ALS as they are expected to
>>> perform certain activities related to ICANN that comply to RALO
>>> requirements in engaging both their own community and their wider
>>> community? If the said ALS don't do that then a potential good members of
>>> such ALS will be of disadvantage.  Then if this potential member applied to
>>> be as individual member in APRALO if they already active in ICANN WGs, are
>>> RALOs ready to accept their application?
>>> This leads to the importance of documentation by ALS activities on
>>> regular or even annual basis on their wiki space as part of basic
>>> requirements to ALS. Not satisfying this basic requirement hints to their
>>> lack of seriousness.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Nadira
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2017 08:56, "Satish Babu" <sb@inapp.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of,
>>> *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large
>>> Review:
>>>
>>> 1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy
>>> processes in RALOs and At-Large.
>>>
>>> 2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers
>>> (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes
>>>
>>> 3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and not
>>> "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also
>>> because we often have no other means of verification
>>>
>>> 4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual
>>> members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps
>>> time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however,
>>> this is not a decision to be taken lightly.
>>>
>>> We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to
>>> learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> satish
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> All good questions.
>>>>
>>>> I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an
>>>> individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that
>>>> ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have
>>>> applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a
>>>> member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web
>>>> form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any
>>>> harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?
>>>>
>>>> Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or
>>>> perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important
>>>> thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in
>>>> ICANN processes.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that says
>>>> that they officially do not belong to an ALS?
>>>>
>>>> This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable
>>>> criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who
>>>> belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are
>>>> individual members not affiliated to any organisation.
>>>>
>>>> I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our
>>>> individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN,
>>>> Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before
>>>> she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and
>>>> we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional
>>>> participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual
>>>> members who represent  the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions,
>>>> APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively
>>>> engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of
>>>> the individual members we currently have on our list  How do we deregister
>>>> them?
>>>>
>>>> I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate
>>>> in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place
>>>> that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we
>>>> encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual
>>>> member does not make sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> M
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > wrote:
>>>> One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort
>>>> involved vs the benefits and risks.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict
>>>> conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a
>>>> personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask
>>>> is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if
>>>> any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of
>>>> accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would
>>>> cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up a
>>>> can of worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>>
>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>>
>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>> outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses?
>>>> ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about
>>>> the significant news from ICANN
>>>> ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual
>>>> Internet users
>>>> ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news
>>>> about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development
>>>> process
>>>> ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education
>>>> programs, regarding ICANN and its work
>>>> ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its
>>>> decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on
>>>> individuals in the region;
>>>> I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people
>>>> who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may
>>>> have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But
>>>> what a hassle.
>>>> But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an
>>>> volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria,
>>>> expectations and metrics.
>>>> Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a
>>>> wiki space for us.
>>>> Maureen
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of
>>>> worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>> outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their
>>>> bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users
>>>> informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach
>>>> activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing
>>>> (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and
>>>> information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping
>>>> and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding
>>>> ICANN and its work
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an
>>>> organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not
>>>> longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks
>>>> Rajnesh.
>>>> The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have
>>>> been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is
>>>> not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a
>>>> person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing
>>>> an example.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> satish   On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh <
>>>> rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the
>>>> process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via
>>>> an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many
>>>> ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.
>>>>
>>>> Raj
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa
>>>> If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an
>>>> individual member? He should already be involved.
>>>>
>>>> M :)
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com
>>>> > wrote: Hi All,
>>>> I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out
>>>> to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards,
>>>> Afifa
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <
>>>> pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff
>>>> there are some with a N/A, please help get that information
>>>> * Do they allow individual members?Yes    Institutional members? N/A
>>>> * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of
>>>> their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees
>>>> (3) Audit Committee
>>>> (5) in Board of Directors
>>>> (35) other membersâ€
>>>>
>>>> * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>
>>>> N/A
>>>> Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :)
>>>> Thanks so much!
>>>> Pavan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> * Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is
>>>> size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership
>>>> are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing
>>>> list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>>>>
>>>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>>>>          1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOG
>>>> XCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGq
>>>> U3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw
>>>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
>>>>          eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j7
>>>> 6W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8
>>>> aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> APAC-Discuss mailing list
>>>> APAC-Discuss@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@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>>
>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>>
>
>

Hi Maureen , I have bellow comment about the below point ; So maybe, once an ALS is registered, then we simply deal with those members who are interested and active whom we will be able to identify via our metrics and establish as the first and second contacts for any communications. . Comments : Every ALS have own bylaw to run the organization . Members of ALS select their EC/ Board members by following their bylaw who are the valid key contact person for any communication . So if you proposed to select first and second contacts from interested person via metrics for any communications, this should not be represented the organization ALS . This is because this selected person might not be elected from the ALS by following their bylaw. So if we consider to represent the organization ALS then we should respect the ALS's bylaw for this issue . *Regards / Jahangir* On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Satish, Regarding to point 4. "4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly."

Many of the ALSes are run by a leadership team who may have no activities to engage their ordinary members. Here I come back to the discussion point on what is the criteria of making sure that a certified ALS is an active ALS as they are expected to perform certain activities related to ICANN that comply to RALO requirements in engaging both their own community and their wider community? If the said ALS don't do that then a potential good members of such ALS will be of disadvantage. Then if this potential member applied to be as individual member in APRALO if they already active in ICANN WGs, are RALOs ready to accept their application? This leads to the importance of documentation by ALS activities on regular or even annual basis on their wiki space as part of basic requirements to ALS. Not satisfying this basic requirement hints to their lack of seriousness.

Best, Nadira

On Dec 3, 2017 08:56, "Satish Babu" <sb@inapp.com> wrote:

There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of, *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large Review:

1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy processes in RALOs and At-Large.

2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes

3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and not "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also because we often have no other means of verification

4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly.

We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.

satish

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:

...

All good questions.

I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?

Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in ICANN processes.

Alan

At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that says that they officially do not belong to an ALS?

This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are individual members not affiliated to any organisation.

I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN, Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual members who represent the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions, APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of the individual members we currently have on our list How do we deregister them?

I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual member does not make sense to me.

M .

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca

...

wrote: One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort involved vs the benefits and risks.

Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.

In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.

Alan

At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:

Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST.

It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India.

Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on individuals in the region; I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But what a hassle. But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria, expectations and metrics. Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a wiki space for us. Maureen

On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of worms. have to take people's word on TRUST. It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC or any ISOC In India. Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work

but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks Rajnesh. The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing an example.

satish On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh < rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.

Raj

On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard < maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an individual member? He should already be involved.

M :)

On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com > wrote: Hi All, I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards, Afifa On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff there are some with a N/A, please help get that information * Do they allow individual members?Yes Institutional members? N/A * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees (3) Audit Committee (5) in Board of Directors (35) other membersâ€

* Can individual members assume leadership positions?

N/A Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :) Thanks so much! Pavan

On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:

* Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.or g/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOG XCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGq U3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j7 6W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8 aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==

_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss

Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org

Hi Maureen ,

Thanks for your reply .

Yes, We can invite any individual member for any event who actually can
contribute about the important ICANN issues and but when question comes for
legal communication and representation of organization ALS then it should
be go through ALS organizational policy like bylaw.




*Regards / Jahangir*


On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I understand what you are saying, Jahangir.  An ALS's bylaws about their
> leadership structure is a valid point but it is separate from the At-Large
> participation issue..
>
> ICANN is obliged to accept the names of the first and second contact of
> the ALS as they are given to us when an ALS is registered because that is
> our (ALAC's) current policy. But if these designated personnel do not
> actively participate then the ALS can be deregistered.  But what if there
> are other individual members of the ALS who do participate - but they are
> NOT the contacts. Our registration procedures do not actually stipulate
> what should happen.
>
> However, what the ALAC has been talking about is that when it comes to
> inviting people to events, like the ATLASIII in 2019 (or whenever), we are
> considering the use of metrics, so that only those individuals who are
> already actively engaged, will be invited even if they are not the
> designated first and second contacts that were assigned by the ALS
> management, and who, in some ALS cases, never turned up to any meetings.
>
> The ATLAS will discuss policy, so we would like to have people
> participating in the discussions who actually know about the important
> ICANN issues and can contribute.
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Jahangir Hossain <jrjahangir@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Maureen ,
>>
>> I have bellow comment about the below point ;
>>
>> So maybe, once an ALS is registered, then we simply deal with those
>> members who are interested and active whom we will be able to identify via
>> our metrics and establish as the first and second contacts for any
>> communications. .
>>
>> Comments : Every ALS have own bylaw to run the organization . Members of
>> ALS select their EC/ Board members by following their bylaw who are the
>> valid key contact person for any communication . So if you proposed to
>> select first and second contacts from interested person via metrics for any
>> communications, this should not be represented the organization ALS . This
>> is because this selected person might not be elected from the ALS by
>> following their bylaw. So if we consider to represent the organization ALS
>> then we should respect the  ALS's bylaw for this issue .
>>
>>
>>
>> *Regards / Jahangir*
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Satish,
>>> Regarding to point 4.
>>> "4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as
>>> individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes.
>>> It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO
>>> levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly."
>>>
>>> Many of the ALSes are run by a leadership team who may have no
>>> activities to engage their ordinary members.
>>> Here I come back to the discussion point on what is the criteria of
>>> making sure that a certified ALS is an active ALS as they are expected to
>>> perform certain activities related to ICANN that comply to RALO
>>> requirements in engaging both their own community and their wider
>>> community? If the said ALS don't do that then a potential good members of
>>> such ALS will be of disadvantage.  Then if this potential member applied to
>>> be as individual member in APRALO if they already active in ICANN WGs, are
>>> RALOs ready to accept their application?
>>> This leads to the importance of documentation by ALS activities on
>>> regular or even annual basis on their wiki space as part of basic
>>> requirements to ALS. Not satisfying this basic requirement hints to their
>>> lack of seriousness.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Nadira
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Dec 3, 2017 08:56, "Satish Babu" <sb@inapp.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of,
>>> *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large
>>> Review:
>>>
>>> 1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy
>>> processes in RALOs and At-Large.
>>>
>>> 2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers
>>> (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes
>>>
>>> 3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and not
>>> "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also
>>> because we often have no other means of verification
>>>
>>> 4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as individual
>>> members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes. It's perhaps
>>> time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO levels...however,
>>> this is not a decision to be taken lightly.
>>>
>>> We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to
>>> learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> satish
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> All good questions.
>>>>
>>>> I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an
>>>> individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that
>>>> ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have
>>>> applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a
>>>> member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web
>>>> form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any
>>>> harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?
>>>>
>>>> Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or
>>>> perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important
>>>> thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in
>>>> ICANN processes.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>> At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that says
>>>> that they officially do not belong to an ALS?
>>>>
>>>> This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable
>>>> criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who
>>>> belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are
>>>> individual members not affiliated to any organisation.
>>>>
>>>> I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our
>>>> individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN,
>>>> Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before
>>>> she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and
>>>> we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional
>>>> participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual
>>>> members who represent  the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions,
>>>> APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively
>>>> engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of
>>>> the individual members we currently have on our list  How do we deregister
>>>> them?
>>>>
>>>> I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate
>>>> in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place
>>>> that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we
>>>> encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual
>>>> member does not make sense to me.
>>>>
>>>> M
>>>> .
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > wrote:
>>>> One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort
>>>> involved vs the benefits and risks.
>>>>
>>>> Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict
>>>> conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a
>>>> personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask
>>>> is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if
>>>> any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.
>>>>
>>>> In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of
>>>> accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would
>>>> cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.
>>>>
>>>> Alan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up a
>>>> can of worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>>
>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>>
>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>> outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses?
>>>> ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about
>>>> the significant news from ICANN
>>>> ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual
>>>> Internet users
>>>> ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news
>>>> about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development
>>>> process
>>>> ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education
>>>> programs, regarding ICANN and its work
>>>> ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its
>>>> decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on
>>>> individuals in the region;
>>>> I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people
>>>> who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may
>>>> have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But
>>>> what a hassle.
>>>> But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an
>>>> volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria,
>>>> expectations and metrics.
>>>> Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a
>>>> wiki space for us.
>>>> Maureen
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of
>>>> worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>> outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their
>>>> bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users
>>>> informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting outreach
>>>> activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing
>>>> (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and
>>>> information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping
>>>> and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding
>>>> ICANN and its work
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an
>>>> organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not
>>>> longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will
>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks
>>>> Rajnesh.
>>>> The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have
>>>> been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is
>>>> not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a
>>>> person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing
>>>> an example.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> satish   On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh <
>>>> rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the
>>>> process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via
>>>> an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many
>>>> ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.
>>>>
>>>> Raj
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa
>>>> If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an
>>>> individual member? He should already be involved.
>>>>
>>>> M :)
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com
>>>> > wrote: Hi All,
>>>> I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out
>>>> to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards,
>>>> Afifa
>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <
>>>> pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff
>>>> there are some with a N/A, please help get that information
>>>> * Do they allow individual members?Yes    Institutional members? N/A
>>>> * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of
>>>> their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees
>>>> (3) Audit Committee
>>>> (5) in Board of Directors
>>>> (35) other membersâ€
>>>>
>>>> * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>
>>>> N/A
>>>> Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :)
>>>> Thanks so much!
>>>> Pavan
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:
>>>>
>>>> * Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is
>>>> size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership
>>>> are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing
>>>> list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>>>>
>>>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>>>>          1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOG
>>>> XCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGq
>>>> U3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw
>>>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
>>>>          eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j7
>>>> 6W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8
>>>> aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> APAC-Discuss mailing list
>>>> APAC-Discuss@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@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>>
>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>>
>
>

Yes Shreedeep

The ALS page and just regular updates straight after an AGM will enable
ICANN staff to update their database on new contacts, but it would be great
if they could also indicate if they are going to be participating regularly
in policy discussions or not.

If not, then other members from that ALS could volunteer to be that ALS's
official "active participants". In that way we would not be annoying ALS
leaders about deregistering their ALS because they haven't been
attending... but they would still get the official notices.

In this way, the COMMUNICATION UPDATES would keep everyone informed. Staff
can keep a database with such relevant information for when we need it.

Perhaps we could implement a request to all ALSs at our APRALO meetings
(similar to the regular call for SOIs at CCWG meetings), about any ALS
membership updates so that they can be recorded in the meeting, and staff
can fix up their databases.

On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:45 PM, Shreedeep Rayamajhi <weaker41@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Very valid point made by Maureen. Yes active participant must be given the
> place and opportunity.
>
>  I think this will also help the ALSs to be active and most importantly
> the update of the organization page as mentioned in the GA needs to be
> monitored of the ALSs.
>
>
> Regards
> Shreedeep Rayamajhi
>
>
> Shreedeep Rayamajhi
>
>
> On Dec 3, 2017 9:57 PM, "Jahangir Hossain" <jrjahangir@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Maureen ,
>
> Thanks for your reply .
>
> Yes, We can invite any individual member for any event who actually can
> contribute about the important ICANN issues and but when question comes
> for legal communication and representation of organization ALS then it
> should be go through ALS organizational policy like bylaw.
>
>
>
>
> *Regards / Jahangir*
>
>
> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Maureen Hilyard <maureen.hilyard@gmail.com
> > wrote:
>
>> I understand what you are saying, Jahangir.  An ALS's bylaws about their
>> leadership structure is a valid point but it is separate from the At-Large
>> participation issue..
>>
>> ICANN is obliged to accept the names of the first and second contact of
>> the ALS as they are given to us when an ALS is registered because that is
>> our (ALAC's) current policy. But if these designated personnel do not
>> actively participate then the ALS can be deregistered.  But what if there
>> are other individual members of the ALS who do participate - but they are
>> NOT the contacts. Our registration procedures do not actually stipulate
>> what should happen.
>>
>> However, what the ALAC has been talking about is that when it comes to
>> inviting people to events, like the ATLASIII in 2019 (or whenever), we are
>> considering the use of metrics, so that only those individuals who are
>> already actively engaged, will be invited even if they are not the
>> designated first and second contacts that were assigned by the ALS
>> management, and who, in some ALS cases, never turned up to any meetings.
>>
>> The ATLAS will discuss policy, so we would like to have people
>> participating in the discussions who actually know about the important
>> ICANN issues and can contribute.
>>
>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:12 AM, Jahangir Hossain <jrjahangir@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Maureen ,
>>>
>>> I have bellow comment about the below point ;
>>>
>>> So maybe, once an ALS is registered, then we simply deal with those
>>> members who are interested and active whom we will be able to identify via
>>> our metrics and establish as the first and second contacts for any
>>> communications. .
>>>
>>> Comments : Every ALS have own bylaw to run the organization . Members
>>> of ALS select their EC/ Board members by following their bylaw who are
>>> the valid key contact person for any communication . So if you proposed to
>>> select first and second contacts from interested person via metrics for any
>>> communications, this should not be represented the organization ALS . This
>>> is because this selected person might not be elected from the ALS by
>>> following their bylaw. So if we consider to represent the organization ALS
>>> then we should respect the  ALS's bylaw for this issue .
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Regards / Jahangir*
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:43 PM, Nadira Alaraj <nadira.araj@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Satish,
>>>> Regarding to point 4.
>>>> "4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as
>>>> individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes.
>>>> It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO
>>>> levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly."
>>>>
>>>> Many of the ALSes are run by a leadership team who may have no
>>>> activities to engage their ordinary members.
>>>> Here I come back to the discussion point on what is the criteria of
>>>> making sure that a certified ALS is an active ALS as they are expected to
>>>> perform certain activities related to ICANN that comply to RALO
>>>> requirements in engaging both their own community and their wider
>>>> community? If the said ALS don't do that then a potential good members of
>>>> such ALS will be of disadvantage.  Then if this potential member applied to
>>>> be as individual member in APRALO if they already active in ICANN WGs, are
>>>> RALOs ready to accept their application?
>>>> This leads to the importance of documentation by ALS activities on
>>>> regular or even annual basis on their wiki space as part of basic
>>>> requirements to ALS. Not satisfying this basic requirement hints to their
>>>> lack of seriousness.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>> Nadira
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 3, 2017 08:56, "Satish Babu" <sb@inapp.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There are several considerations that we have to be mindful of,
>>>> *vis-a-vis* individual members, particularly after the recent At-Large
>>>> Review:
>>>>
>>>> 1. RALOs should encourage individual members to participate in policy
>>>> processes in RALOs and At-Large.
>>>>
>>>> 2. For this, we need to ensure that individuals have low entry barriers
>>>> (ie., a light-weight admission process) compared to ALSes
>>>>
>>>> 3. The current admission process for individual members ("Trust" and
>>>> not "Trust-but-verify") is based on keeping entry barriers low, but also
>>>> because we often have no other means of verification
>>>>
>>>> 4. The current rules on not admitting existing ALS members as
>>>> individual members to APRALO is based on the potential to weaken ALSes.
>>>> It's perhaps time that these rules are reviewed at both ALAC and RALO
>>>> levels...however, this is not a decision to be taken lightly.
>>>>
>>>> We are in the early phase of inducting individual members. We have to
>>>> learn as we go and fine-tune our rules.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> satish
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> All good questions.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can even add another. Is there any harm in a person becoming an
>>>>> individual member who is a member of an ALS, but is not active in that
>>>>> ALS's activities with respect to being an ALS. That situation could have
>>>>> applied to me - I was an individual member, but was also historically a
>>>>> member of an ISOC Chapter, but only because I had ticked off a box on a web
>>>>> form, not because I was active in it in any way. Would there have been any
>>>>> harm in my continuing to be a "member" of that ALS?
>>>>>
>>>>> Ultimately, these are issues that either all RALOs must address, or
>>>>> perhaps we will come up with a uniform cross-RALO criteria. An important
>>>>> thing to keep in mind is that the overall target is to get people active in
>>>>> ICANN processes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>> At 03/12/2017 01:30 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> But should we get individual members to sign a piece of paper that
>>>>> says that they officially do not belong to an ALS?
>>>>>
>>>>> This discussion is important as APRALO seeks to confirm acceptable
>>>>> criteria for registration of our ALSes (and any individual members who
>>>>> belong to it and want to join in our discussions), as well as those who are
>>>>> individual members not affiliated to any organisation.
>>>>>
>>>>> I like the example of our the Abu Dhabi representative of our
>>>>> individual members - due to her own personal interest in the work of ICANN,
>>>>> Justine was already an active member of a couple of working groups before
>>>>> she became a formal individual member of APRALO. She was a known entity and
>>>>> we have welcomed her participation in our discussions as a regional
>>>>> participant in the same way as we accept the inputs of the individual
>>>>> members who represent  the interests of their ALSes. In past discussions,
>>>>> APRALO raised the point that individual members should already be actively
>>>>> engaged before we register them. There has been poor commitment by some of
>>>>> the individual members we currently have on our list  How do we deregister
>>>>> them?
>>>>>
>>>>> I can appreciate that sometimes people may not be able to participate
>>>>> in an organisation that meets face to face normally at a time and place
>>>>> that is not convenient for everyone... and this was the reason we
>>>>> encouraged individual members. But leaving an ALS to become an individual
>>>>> member does not make sense to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> M
>>>>> .
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 7:38 PM, Alan Greenberg <
>>>>> alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca > wrote:
>>>>> One has to put these things in perspective and to examine the effort
>>>>> involved vs the benefits and risks.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking at an unrelated issue, ICANN directors are subject to strict
>>>>> conflict of interest rules because it is important that they not have a
>>>>> personal interest when making decisions on behalf of ICANN. But all we ask
>>>>> is that they sign a piece of paper affirming what their conflicts are (if
>>>>> any) and assuring that should one arise, they will act properly.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the case of individual members, one has to look at the risks of
>>>>> accepting people's word, the harm it would cause, and now much it would
>>>>> cost/difficulty to investigate further vs the benefits.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At 02/12/2017 07:10 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry that was sent too early, accidentally This is really opening up
>>>>> a can of worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>>>
>>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>>>
>>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>>> outreach so that they can fulfil the other ICANN expectations of ALses?
>>>>> ØKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about
>>>>> the significant news from ICANN
>>>>> ØPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual
>>>>> Internet users
>>>>> ØDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news
>>>>> about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development
>>>>> process
>>>>> ØDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education
>>>>> programs, regarding ICANN and its work
>>>>> ØMaking public, and analyzing, ICANN's proposed policies and its
>>>>> decisions and their (potential)regional impact and (potential) effect on
>>>>> individuals in the region;
>>>>> I started to make mention of the fact that we could have to ask people
>>>>> who have disagreements with their ALS managements and leave, that they may
>>>>> have to bring along a letter saying that they are no longer members. But
>>>>> what a hassle.
>>>>> But it is one of the thngs that I would like to discuss with an
>>>>> volunteers of a group of APRALO members to discuss ALS criteria,
>>>>> expectations and metrics.
>>>>> Anyone want to join, drop me a line, and I will get staff to create a
>>>>> wiki space for us.
>>>>> Maureen
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 2:03 PM, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: This is really opening up a can of
>>>>> worms.   have to take people's word on TRUST.
>>>>> It has already been intimated that we might need to get the membership
>>>>> lists of all our ALSes to check on whether people are legitimately NOT
>>>>> members - I can just imagine trying to keep track of the members of PICISOC
>>>>> or any ISOC In India.
>>>>> Becoming an individual member to be able to contribute on your own
>>>>> behalf rather than a group's view is legitimate, but how does a single
>>>>> person compete against a chartered organisation for regional funds to do
>>>>> outreach so that thy can fulfil the other ICANN expectations in their
>>>>> bylaws of ALses? ØKeeping the community of individual Internet
>>>>> users informed about the significant news from ICANN ØPromoting
>>>>> outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ØDistributing
>>>>> (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and
>>>>> information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ØDeveloping
>>>>> and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding
>>>>> ICANN and its work
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>   but we also have to be mindful, that if former ALS members leave an
>>>>> organisation, they may require a formal letter indicating that they are not
>>>>> longer a member as part of the RALO application process. This will
>>>>> On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 3:26 AM, Satish Babu <sb@inapp.com> wrote: Thanks
>>>>> Rajnesh.
>>>>> The current mechanism is a self-declaration by the applicant. We have
>>>>> been finding that this doesn't always work. As you have pointed out, it is
>>>>> not always easy to keep track of the affiliations of organizations that a
>>>>> person is a member of. We will consider revising the wording or providing
>>>>> an example.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> satish   On Sat, Dec 2, 2017 at 6:28 PM, Rajnesh Singh <
>>>>> rajnesh.singh@gmail.com > wrote: So I wonder out loud what is the
>>>>> process to ensure that an individual applicant is not already a member via
>>>>> an ALS? This could get messy as one could belong to one of many
>>>>> ALS̢۪ - like e I do for example. Sometimes hard to track, be aware of.
>>>>>
>>>>> Raj
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 27 Nov 2017 at 1:38 pm, Maureen Hilyard <
>>>>> maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> wrote: Hi Afifa
>>>>> If Buddha is already a member of ISOC Kolkata then he cannot be an
>>>>> individual member? He should already be involved.
>>>>>
>>>>> M :)
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:58 AM, Afifa Abbas <afifa.abbas118@gmail.com
>>>>> > wrote: Hi All,
>>>>> I met Buddha in Abu Dhabi and he seems very passionate. He reached out
>>>>> to me for an outreach. I totally support their application. Regards,
>>>>> Afifa
>>>>> On Thu, Nov 23, 2017 at 7:43 AM, Pavan Budhrani * <
>>>>> pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote: Please check the answers below, Staff
>>>>> there are some with a N/A, please help get that information
>>>>> * Do they allow individual members?Yes    Institutional members? N/A
>>>>> * What is size of their membership at this time? What proportion of
>>>>> their membership are individuals? (10) in Board of Trustees
>>>>> (3) Audit Committee
>>>>> (5) in Board of Directors
>>>>> (35) other membersâ€
>>>>>
>>>>> * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>>
>>>>> N/A
>>>>> Also please help follow up with Buddha Haldar, Staff :)
>>>>> Thanks so much!
>>>>> Pavan
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/21/17 9:01 PM, Satish Babu wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> * Do they allow individual members? Institutional members? * What is
>>>>> size of their membership at this time? What proportion of their membership
>>>>> are individuals? * Can individual members assume leadership positions?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing
>>>>> list APAC-Discuss@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>>>>>
>>>>> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>>>>> Content-Disposition: inline
>>>>> X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics:
>>>>>          1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOG
>>>>> XCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGq
>>>>> U3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw
>>>>> X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
>>>>>          eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j7
>>>>> 6W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8
>>>>> aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> APAC-Discuss mailing list
>>>>> APAC-Discuss@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@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@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
>
> Homepage for the region: http://www.apralo.org
>
>
>