Re: [APAC-Discuss] APRALO Application for new ALS and Individual Applications
"But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?" At the moment, and for the reasonable future, all we need to do is ask those who claim to be part of At-Large what their affiliation is. I think this is a reason able thing to task At-Large Staff with. Alan At 03/12/2017 08:08 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Alan
Exactly.. You are correct that we don't currently have these rules in APRALO at the moment.. However, APRALO is continuing a conversation we started in Abu Dhabi about how to engage our ALSes and individual members better, but also acknowledging those who are doing the work, rather than those who have official titles and don't do anything.
But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?
I plan to call a formal meeting of an APRALO working group, to formalise some of the ideas we are proposing in this conversation, which we will propose to the wider At-Large working group later on.
M.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alan Greenberg <<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote: "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."
Maureen, unless you have such a rule in APRALO (and I could not find one on a quick review), that is not necessarily true. The representatives are just that, representatives. They are the ones to take formal action on behalf of the ALS (such as vote if and when there are votes). An ALS judged to be active can be because other members of the ALS are active in At-Large and ICANN processes.
Of course the problem is that right now is that we have no practical way of automatically recognizing this - it relies on self-declaration or one of us "knowing" which ALS a person is associated with.
A;an
At 03/12/2017 08:40 AM, Maureen Hilyard 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 <<mailto:jrjahangir@gmail.com>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 <<mailto:nadira.araj@gmail.com>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" <<mailto:sb@inapp.com>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 <<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>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 <<mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>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? ÃÆÃâKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ÃÆÃâPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ÃÆÃâDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ÃÆÃâDeveloping and maintaining on-going information and education programs, regarding ICANN and its work ÃÆÃâMaking 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 <<mailto:maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> 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? ÃÆÃâKeeping the community of individual Internet users informed about the significant news from ICANN ÃÆÃâPromoting outreach activities in the community of individual Internet users ÃÆÃâDistributing (through posting or otherwise) an updated agenda, news about ICANN, and information about items in the ICANN policy-development process ÃÆÃâDeveloping 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 <<mailto:sb@inapp.com>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 <<mailto:rajnesh.singh@gmail.com>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 ALS̢̮ - - - 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 <<mailto:maureen.hilyard@gmail.com> 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 <<mailto:afifa.abbas118@gmail.com>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 * <<mailto:pavan@namesphere.asia>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 members̢̮ * 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 <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>http://www.apralo.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>http://www.apralo.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>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:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOGXCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGqU3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j76W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org/>http://www.apralo.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>http://www.apralo.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>http://www.apralo.org
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org>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:uMj0BLUhE27piBfr4+JaKSWpv5Bw2d7gnrp38ADwQMfiQoGM3Vv1OZEXKQIQbKXrj5DM9dSbpoujGHo1XYItD2TtRkRtDJSo8ym90yTHeP79mDB2qr3dSlUAsF1i3qN5 X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info:
/RWePDCGUj8JIP3hmEqExEuluNPxAxeY3ZtkzdWDh9MeEJXhgRpOflq2RpmMNmn2vEgJm55tKcmg9S65oEshASaSOH9DTFbAzXwQqzYRqHFCxR5BFCX3lm2hYEpJJHutUbUJjU7yzlqAT5Ij/W8Szg==
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list <mailto:APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org>APAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/apac-discuss
Homepage for the region: <http://www.apralo.org/>http://www.apralo.org
On Mon, Dec 4, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
"But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?"
At the moment, and for the reasonable future, all we need to do is ask those who claim to be part of At-Large what their affiliation is. I think this is a reason able thing to task At-Large Staff with.
I agree. This is what our due diligence currently does. satish
At 03/12/2017 08:08 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Alan
Exactly.. You are correct that we don't currently have these rules in APRALO at the moment.. However, APRALO is continuing a conversation we started in Abu Dhabi about how to engage our ALSes and individual members better, but also acknowledging those who are doing the work, rather than those who have official titles and don't do anything.
But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?
I plan to call a formal meeting of an APRALO working group, to formalise some of the ideas we are proposing in this conversation, which we will propose to the wider At-Large working group later on.
M.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
wrote: "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."
Maureen, unless you have such a rule in APRALO (and I could not find one on a quick review), that is not necessarily true. The representatives are just that, representatives. They are the ones to take formal action on behalf of the ALS (such as vote if and when there are votes). An ALS judged to be active can be because other members of the ALS are active in At-Large and ICANN processes.
Of course the problem is that right now is that we have no practical way of automatically recognizing this - it relies on self-declaration or one of us "knowing" which ALS a person is associated with.
A;an
At 03/12/2017 08:40 AM, Maureen Hilyard 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 ALS’ - - - 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 members†* 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
_______________________________________________ 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:uMj0BLUhE27piBfr4+ JaKSWpv5Bw2d7gnrp38ADwQMfiQoGM3Vv1OZEXKQIQbKXrj5DM9dSbpoujGH o1XYItD2TtRkRtDJSo8ym90yTHeP79mDB2qr3dSlUAsF1i3qN5 X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: /RWePDCGUj8JIP3hmEqExEuluNPxAxeY3ZtkzdWDh9MeEJXhgRpOflq2RpmMN mn2vEgJm55tKcmg9S65oEshASaSOH9DTFbAzXwQqzYRqHFCxR5BFCX3lm2hY EpJJHutUbUJjU7yzlqAT5Ij/W8Szg==
_______________________________________________ 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
At the moment, the status quo exists.. We certainly aren't asking staff to make any changes to what they are currently doing. The discussions we are having among the RALO at the moment relates to how we might do things differently if we had the chance to change things for the better in the future. There are lots of things that have to be sorted through. On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
"But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?"
At the moment, and for the reasonable future, all we need to do is ask those who claim to be part of At-Large what their affiliation is. I think this is a reason able thing to task At-Large Staff with.
Alan
At 03/12/2017 08:08 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Alan
Exactly.. You are correct that we don't currently have these rules in APRALO at the moment.. However, APRALO is continuing a conversation we started in Abu Dhabi about how to engage our ALSes and individual members better, but also acknowledging those who are doing the work, rather than those who have official titles and don't do anything.
But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?
I plan to call a formal meeting of an APRALO working group, to formalise some of the ideas we are proposing in this conversation, which we will propose to the wider At-Large working group later on.
M.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
wrote: "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."
Maureen, unless you have such a rule in APRALO (and I could not find one on a quick review), that is not necessarily true. The representatives are just that, representatives. They are the ones to take formal action on behalf of the ALS (such as vote if and when there are votes). An ALS judged to be active can be because other members of the ALS are active in At-Large and ICANN processes.
Of course the problem is that right now is that we have no practical way of automatically recognizing this - it relies on self-declaration or one of us "knowing" which ALS a person is associated with.
A;an
At 03/12/2017 08:40 AM, Maureen Hilyard 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 ALS’ - - - 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 members†* 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
_______________________________________________ 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:uMj0BLUhE27piBfr4+ JaKSWpv5Bw2d7gnrp38ADwQMfiQoGM3Vv1OZEXKQIQbKXrj5DM9dSbpoujGH o1XYItD2TtRkRtDJSo8ym90yTHeP79mDB2qr3dSlUAsF1i3qN5 X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: /RWePDCGUj8JIP3hmEqExEuluNPxAxeY3ZtkzdWDh9MeEJXhgRpOflq2RpmMN mn2vEgJm55tKcmg9S65oEshASaSOH9DTFbAzXwQqzYRqHFCxR5BFCX3lm2hY EpJJHutUbUJjU7yzlqAT5Ij/W8Szg==
_______________________________________________ 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 all, for the 2 questions, they have replied. YODET indeed allows institutional membership; some of the initiatives have already become members. As for individual members, leadership positions are accessible based on merit. Please let me know your decision and we can go ahead to the ALAC vote. Thanks Pavan Budhrani On 12/4/17 10:55 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
At the moment, the status quo exists.. We certainly aren't asking staff to make any changes to what they are currently doing.
The discussions we are having among the RALO at the moment relates to how we might do things differently if we had the chance to change things for the better in the future. There are lots of things that have to be sorted through.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>> wrote:
"But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?"
At the moment, and for the reasonable future, all we need to do is ask those who claim to be part of At-Large what their affiliation is. I think this is a reason able thing to task At-Large Staff with.
Alan
At 03/12/2017 08:08 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Alan
Exactly.. You are correct that we don't currently have these rules in APRALO at the moment.. However, APRALO is continuing a conversation we started in Abu Dhabi about how to engage our ALSes and individual members better, but also acknowledging those who are doing the work, rather than those who have official titles and don't do anything.
But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?
I plan to call a formal meeting of an APRALO working group, to formalise some of the ideas we are proposing in this conversation, which we will propose to the wider At-Large working group later on.
M.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca <mailto:alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> > wrote:
"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."
Maureen, unless you have such a rule in APRALO (and I could not find one on a quick review), that is not necessarily true. The representatives are just that, representatives. They are the ones to take formal action on behalf of the ALS (such as vote if and when there are votes). An ALS judged to be active can be because other members of the ALS are active in At-Large and ICANN processes.
Of course the problem is that right now is that we have no practical way of automatically recognizing this - it relies on self-declaration or one of us "knowing" which ALS a person is associated with.
A;an
At 03/12/2017 08:40 AM, Maureen Hilyard 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 ALS’ - - - 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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 <mailto: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 members†* 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 <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@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@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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:Srfkh4jMTPJ8WrxeOjAtIRChc2heIjw3LAdbzOGXCvdx1BezzRbmYrvdWadnewu8QLX8BJPKAb1bz094UVqi4ed+ARFWi4WxLGqU3igsvebpIbwjEIbbPVhKGHN+LcAw X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: eAoV1FU3698VoYJnX1zhvZvia4i32P9ShSYIKBLKzac/FRZUG47oH6l/a9j76W4EMLQlRwOTqhhtGAjMG33SZXNxKk78AHCa3enFknSapNOyM0ylJFAKm9T8aPA75+NX9Ie936+2z8E31pW/NoyR7g==
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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 <http://www.apralo.org/>
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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@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@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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:uMj0BLUhE27piBfr4+JaKSWpv5Bw2d7gnrp38ADwQMfiQoGM3Vv1OZEXKQIQbKXrj5DM9dSbpoujGHo1XYItD2TtRkRtDJSo8ym90yTHeP79mDB2qr3dSlUAsF1i3qN5 X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: /RWePDCGUj8JIP3hmEqExEuluNPxAxeY3ZtkzdWDh9MeEJXhgRpOflq2RpmMNmn2vEgJm55tKcmg9S65oEshASaSOH9DTFbAzXwQqzYRqHFCxR5BFCX3lm2hYEpJJHutUbUJjU7yzlqAT5Ij/W8Szg==
_______________________________________________ APAC-Discuss mailing list APAC-Discuss@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 <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 Pavan, I think we can go ahead and recommend to ALAC that we admit YODET. satish On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 1:16 PM, Pavan Budhrani * <pavan@namesphere.asia> wrote:
Dear all, for the 2 questions, they have replied. YODET indeed allows institutional membership; some of the initiatives have already become members.
As for individual members, leadership positions are accessible based on merit.
Please let me know your decision and we can go ahead to the ALAC vote.
Thanks
Pavan Budhrani
On 12/4/17 10:55 AM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
At the moment, the status quo exists.. We certainly aren't asking staff to make any changes to what they are currently doing.
The discussions we are having among the RALO at the moment relates to how we might do things differently if we had the chance to change things for the better in the future. There are lots of things that have to be sorted through.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
"But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?"
At the moment, and for the reasonable future, all we need to do is ask those who claim to be part of At-Large what their affiliation is. I think this is a reason able thing to task At-Large Staff with.
Alan
At 03/12/2017 08:08 PM, Maureen Hilyard wrote:
Hi Alan
Exactly.. You are correct that we don't currently have these rules in APRALO at the moment.. However, APRALO is continuing a conversation we started in Abu Dhabi about how to engage our ALSes and individual members better, but also acknowledging those who are doing the work, rather than those who have official titles and don't do anything.
But how do we recognise the ones who do the work?
I plan to call a formal meeting of an APRALO working group, to formalise some of the ideas we are proposing in this conversation, which we will propose to the wider At-Large working group later on.
M.
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 2:35 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
wrote: "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."
Maureen, unless you have such a rule in APRALO (and I could not find one on a quick review), that is not necessarily true. The representatives are just that, representatives. They are the ones to take formal action on behalf of the ALS (such as vote if and when there are votes). An ALS judged to be active can be because other members of the ALS are active in At-Large and ICANN processes.
Of course the problem is that right now is that we have no practical way of automatically recognizing this - it relies on self-declaration or one of us "knowing" which ALS a person is associated with.
A;an
At 03/12/2017 08:40 AM, Maureen Hilyard 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 ALS’ - - - 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 members†* 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
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline X-Microsoft-Exchange-Diagnostics: 1;YQXPR0101MB1589;27:uMj0BLUhE27piBfr4+JaKSWpv5Bw2d7gnrp38AD wQMfiQoGM3Vv1OZEXKQIQbKXrj5DM9dSbpoujGHo1XYItD2TtRkRtDJSo8ym 90yTHeP79mDB2qr3dSlUAsF1i3qN5 X-Microsoft-Antispam-Message-Info: /RWePDCGUj8JIP3hmEqExEuluNPxAxeY3ZtkzdWDh9MeEJXhgRpOflq2RpmM Nmn2vEgJm55tKcmg9S65oEshASaSOH9DTFbAzXwQqzYRqHFCxR5BFCX3lm2h YEpJJHutUbUJjU7yzlqAT5Ij/W8Szg==
_______________________________________________ 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 listAPAC-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.orghttps://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
participants (4)
-
Alan Greenberg -
Maureen Hilyard -
Pavan Budhrani * -
Satish Babu