June 2008 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

[Reminder] ALAC Monthly Teleconference @ Tue 10 Jun 13:30 – 15:00 ()
by Google Calendar June 9, 2008

June 9, 2008

alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org, this is a reminder for Title: ALAC Monthly Teleconference Time: Tue 10 Jun 13:30 – 15:00 (Time zone: GMT (no daylight saving)) Calendar: Description: Please see https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?2008 for all meeting agendas, minutes, recordings and other details of ALAC's meetings. Start time 1330 UTC. You can view this event at http://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW&eid=NmFwMmlsdWNodmR1aXA0ZH… You are receiving this courtesy email at the account alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org because you are an attendee of this event. To stop receiving future notifications for this event, decline this event. Alternatively, you can sign up for a Google account at http://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for your entire calendar.

1 0

Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 9, 2008

June 9, 2008

Izumi and all, Of course your quite right Izumi. And thank you for confirming our members long ago proposal and position. Well done! We also must all try to realize although there are "pockets" of limited connectivity or no connectivity at all, ICANN, nor the ALS'es or the ALAC can take responsibility for such. And it is the host country where either limited connectivity or no connectivity to correct or address such. As such, those folks are either not users at all, or are marginalized by poor governmental and private sector stuartship of their own countrymen. Another concern that you did not touch upon are those that due to their countries political positions, they do not allow their Internet users to participate in a meaningful way in user based organizations. So again, this is not ICANN or the ALS'es/ALAC's problem to solve, but can work if diligent, to lesson or eliminate such restrictions on a case by case basis. But such efforts are expensive in terms of finances and personal individual dedication. Something I myself haven't seen or heard of demonstrated by either ICANN nor the ALS'es/ALAC members other than yourself. However given that the ALAC and the ALS'es are having trouble financing it's members to attend meetings, or generate it's own finances, this comes a no surprise what so ever. -----Original Message----- >From: Izumi AIZU <iza(a)anr.org> >Sent: Jun 8, 2008 7:33 PM >To: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large > >I like to point out that web tools will not provide "fair representation" >globally. > >There are many areas and regions where still access is >a big problem, many are using only dial-ups and they are expensive. >Norbert Klein from Cambodia has always pointed out this issue. >I am now working on the remote island and mountain areas access >problem both home in Japan and to some degree for Nepal. > >So when "massive" campaign is employed, they are usually voices >from developed regions with good connectivity, yet other people will be >very much left out. > >I am in favor of using web tools, however, to be a good reference >tool and out-reach means. They can be a good complementary >tool, but not a simple alternative to the ALS/RALO/ALAC process >per se. I hope people all agree with this. > >Of course, current ALAC-RALO-ALS framework is not perfect >and does not solve the access issue, but we have to be very >cafeful. > >One of the reasons why the current structure was proposed was >the reflection of the "global" election where some countries >such as mine, Japan, seemed to dominate the regional membership >since the government and industry effectively organized the >targeted campaign and there was no means to stop that that time. > >AND also after the AtLarge Directors were elected from five regions, >most of them lost contact with the consituencies, or the very people >who voted and elected them, since >a) ICANN destroyed all the memebrship data and communication >means, >b) most, if not all, directors didn't or couldn't maintain the >communication with the consituencies constantly, >and >c) there were no effective mechanism to guarantee that within ICANN > >So there was some empahsis on "informed participation" than >"mechanical representation" at that time. > >I do not intend to say "keep the status quo" at all, but while AtLarge >or ALAC is under the review now, I think it might be good to take >some old lessons from the past to create the new future. > >best, > >izumi > > >2008/6/9 Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk>: >> Agreed. >> >> Dominik >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Evan Leibovitch [mailto:evan@telly.org] >> Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 5:10 PM >> To: Dominik Filipp >> Cc: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; At-Large Worldwide >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >> >> Dominik Filipp wrote: >>> Try to see the positives. I wouldn't see it that dramatically. Access >>> to the Internet, regular or on occasion, is available in many many >>> countries. And the other means are by no means excluded. >>> >> IMO, At-Large is essentially the global community of "users of the >> Internet". As such, most people who would have an interest in ICANN, one >> would think, would at very least have Internet access. >> >> Improving IT literacy and giving people access to the Internet are >> extremely important issues, but outside the bounds of ICANN. It just >> strikes me as simple logic that someone without access to the Internet >> is likely not interested in -- and may be incapable of really >> understanding -- the controversies of its management. >> >> For that reason I would agree with Dominik that online surveys are an >> effective -- and certainly a cost effective -- manner to receive input >> from large numbers of community members who are at least Internet-aware. >> The main flaw with this tactic is that it is passive: surveys cannot >> solicit opinion, they can only wait for opinion to come to them. Left >> alone and unsupported, surveys only attract the brash and self-assured, >> which biases the results. For this reason IMO online surveys need to be >> accompanied by grassroots (ALS) support and publicity, to encourage >> people to understand the questions being surveyed and to participate. >> >> Such a combination, IMO, is hard to surpass in potential reach and cost >> effectiveness. It may not be the only solution, but it is to me the best >> one when resources are limited and the audience can be presumed to at >> least be aware enough to operate the survey. >> >> - Evan >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> >> > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 8, 2008

June 8, 2008

Dominik and all, Also agreed. Now if we can only get Evan and TELLY.ORG, his DN, to be up to DNS configuration standard so that proper and creditable education of less than knowledgable users can be adaquately, ethically, and properly conducted and his advocacy of same considered in a truly meaningful manner. See:http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/dnsreport.ch?domain=telly.org&token=0660d… No SPF record is not exceptable. Otherwise, wiser or reasonably knowledgable users will rightly question the advocacy of Evan's stated convictions accordingly. -----Original Message----- >From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Sent: Jun 8, 2008 8:55 AM >To: Evan Leibovitch <evan(a)telly.org> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large > >Agreed. > >Dominik > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Evan Leibovitch [mailto:evan@telly.org] >Sent: Sunday, June 08, 2008 5:10 PM >To: Dominik Filipp >Cc: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; At-Large Worldwide >Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large > >Dominik Filipp wrote: >> Try to see the positives. I wouldn't see it that dramatically. Access >> to the Internet, regular or on occasion, is available in many many >> countries. And the other means are by no means excluded. >> >IMO, At-Large is essentially the global community of "users of the >Internet". As such, most people who would have an interest in ICANN, one >would think, would at very least have Internet access. > >Improving IT literacy and giving people access to the Internet are >extremely important issues, but outside the bounds of ICANN. It just >strikes me as simple logic that someone without access to the Internet >is likely not interested in -- and may be incapable of really >understanding -- the controversies of its management. > >For that reason I would agree with Dominik that online surveys are an >effective -- and certainly a cost effective -- manner to receive input >from large numbers of community members who are at least Internet-aware. >The main flaw with this tactic is that it is passive: surveys cannot >solicit opinion, they can only wait for opinion to come to them. Left >alone and unsupported, surveys only attract the brash and self-assured, >which biases the results. For this reason IMO online surveys need to be >accompanied by grassroots (ALS) support and publicity, to encourage >people to understand the questions being surveyed and to participate. > >Such a combination, IMO, is hard to surpass in potential reach and cost >effectiveness. It may not be the only solution, but it is to me the best >one when resources are limited and the audience can be presumed to at >least be aware enough to operate the survey. > >- Evan > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Outreach - Yup, need to do more..
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

Robert and all, Beau is not the only one with allot of experiance with surveys. INEGroup does them on a fairly regular basis via Email to members and assiciates or other interested parties that make a request to be included in such. Additionally Vote.com is another avenue that can be used, but they can be a bit high on price. Outreach is not difficult as some seem to believe, but it does require diligance, and extreme interest as well as an ethical presence of openess without predjudice. This is how we built INEGroup and it is still growing. -----Original Message----- >From: Robert Guerra <lists(a)privaterra.info> >Sent: Jun 7, 2008 1:03 PM >To: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] Outreach - Yup, need to do more.. > >Dominic, > >Actually, we do agree. Just that I don't see survey's in isolation - >but part of a larger view of outreach, one that includes a far better >communications and assessment tools , such as surveys. > >Surveys can be done in all sorts of ways. However, if we want to have >it done well in a way that can really represent users from around the >world, then time and indeed money needs to be spent. A suggestion >thus, would be to recommend to the at-large director to allocate a >line item in our budget (present and/or future) so that a professional >survey could be done . > >Beau's organization has experience in this. so, his comments would be >- i think quite helpful. > >regards > >Robert > > > >On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:50 PM, Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> wrote: >> Robert, >> >> No, it is just one of my views how the public community could be >> participating. Sure, there are many open questions and I am not >> proposing anything final. Just I think that this approach, when >> effectively brought into life, would be much more transparent than the >> current status where there is practically no any measurable and >> verifiable input of real public needs or reactions on proposed >> solutions. >> >> Regards >> >> Dominik >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Robert Guerra >> Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 9:39 PM >> To: At-Large Worldwide >> Subject: [At-Large] Outreach - Yup, need to do more.. >> >> Sounds like you are referring to - outreach - something mention, I >> think as a key objective that ALS's and ALAC needs to be doing. In my >> opinion, there is much outreach still as - for the most part - most >> internet users have no idea that there is a space for them to learn >> about and participate in - the governance and policies of ICANN.. >> >> regards >> >> Robert >> >> >> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >> wrote: >>> Jacqueline, >>> >>> This is just an idea to think over. Online surveys, when massively >>> publicly announced, can be a very efficient means to collect large >>> pattern of public opinions. I know there are countries where the >>> Internet access is perhaps not that obvious as in developed countries; >> >>> and I am not proposing to restrict the gathering of opinions solely to >> >>> the surveys, there are also other means worth considering. But the >>> Internet access is widely spread nowadays and covers a large part of >>> the planet. >>> >>> I hope we can both agree that online surveys would be a significant >>> first step towards the public community. And they can be conducted on >>> regional level by ALSes. Other approaches can be considered in >>> parallel, no problem. >>> >>> Dominik >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline >> A. >>> Morris >>> Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 9:01 PM >>> To: At-Large Worldwide >>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>> >>> More problems than that - how do you propose that ALL users get a >>> chance to participate? Web polls and such tools are not sufficient to >>> reach the vast majority of users in the developing world, or do you >>> want to continue to leave us out? >>> Jacqueline >>> Dominik Filipp wrote: >>>> >>>> As a necessary prerequisite, assume that the at-large has a voting >>>> power. As I already elaborated on this a little on the GA, I see one >>>> possibility in establishing a quantifiable public input in form of >>>> online surveys, straw polls, polling booths, etc. accessible to >>>> everyone interesting in issues upon subscription/registration to a >>>> specific list and possibly some other basic verification mechanisms. >>>> Prior to public voting there will be some sufficient room for public >>>> deliberation and various discussions on issues similarly as it is now >> >>>> on the lists. This, however, opens some questions, for instance, how >>>> to consolidate the 'public result' (gathered after counting up the >>>> final public survey >>>> votes) when it is in contradiction with a significant or apparent >>>> fact >>> >>>> questioning the effectiveness of the public result. But I think this >>>> is not as impassable problem as it might seem at first glance and, in >> >>>> my opinion, can be overcome. >>>> >>>> >>>> Dominik >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] >>>> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:49 PM >>>> To: Dominik Filipp; Jacqueline Morris; dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; >>>> aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov >>>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide; alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca; bev(a)pcna.ca; >>>> icann-list(a)sorehands.com; BClist(a)bizconst.org; namecritic(a)blogs.pn; >>>> Brenbe(a)consumer.org; bfausett(a)internet.law.pro; >>>> CWallace(a)cygnacom.com; >>> >>>> carlton.samuels(a)uwimona.edu.jm; cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au; >>>> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; dave(a)farber.net; denise.michel(a)icann.org; >>>> derek(a)aa419.org; dpefeva(a)isoc.bg; Dominik Filipp; >>>> elisabeth.porteneuve(a)cetp.ipsl.fr; enoss(a)tucows.com; >>>> frederic.teboul(a)icann.org; ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov; cgomes(a)verisign.com; >>>> iza(a)anr.org; jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; jefsey(a)club-internet.fr; >>>> jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net; kp2007(a)friscotx.com; >>>> matthias.langenegger(a)icann.org; mike(a)palage.com; >>>> michele(a)blacknight.ie; Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.us; >>>> jnevett(a)networksolutions.com; nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org; >>>> Paul.Paray(a)CNA.COM; patrick(a)vande-walle.eu; twomey(a)icann.org; >>>> robert(a)privaterra.org; roberto(a)icann.org; ross(a)tucows.com; >>>> stacy.burnette(a)icann.org; sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr; >>>> roessler(a)does-not-exist.org; vb(a)bertola.eu; wendy(a)seltzer.com; >>>> joly(a)punkcast.com >>>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>>> >>>> Dominik and all, >>>> >>>> The more important problem with the ALAC and the ALS'es is that of >>>> accountability and transparency. >>>> Not only too ICANN but unto themselves. Only 15 voting members in >>>> the >>> >>>> ALAC?! How is that possible? >>>> How is such legitimate to users? How is such accountable to users? >>>> Frankly, it isn't accountable, nor ligitimate/transparent. It is of >>>> course *possible* if those that have the control of the servers for >>>> list forums and other underpennings are not themselves honest, >>>> transparent, and ethically accountable. >>>> >>>> If each user that is a participant of any ALS and/or the ALAC >>>> cannot >>> >>>> vote on any issue, there is little or no accountability. If any user >> >>>> that is a participant to any ALS or the ALAC cannot vote and freely >>>> participate on any ALS or ALAC forum uninhibited, there is little or >>>> no transparency nor accountability. >>>> >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> >>>>> From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >>>>> Sent: Jun 6, 2008 8:59 AM >>>>> To: Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>, >>>>> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>>>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>>>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>>>> >>>>> Jacqueline, >>>>> >>>>> Danny is talking about principal things. The fact is that at-large >>>>> in >>> >>>>> its current status should be advocating the wide user community, >>>>> which is over 99% of all people/bodies recognized as Internet >>> stakeholders. >>>>> The fact that this vast majority has no representative voting seats >>>>> is simply unacceptable, dishonesting and a failure of the commitment >> >>>>> given >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> to the public community. That is, every efforts not targeted this >>>>> direction is just tacit collaboration in making up this cover-up and >> >>>>> an >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> extension of the agony. >>>>> >>>>> The fact that you have managed something in the air is, sorry, >>>>> nearly >>> >>>>> nothing in comparison to the great loss of real and representative >>>>> voting power. I am sorry but without this all this are just >>>>> toothless >>> >>>>> toys for children playing in the sand. Jacqueline and some others, I >> >>>>> don't diminish all the efforts and the sincerity you have invested >>>>> into >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> it but realize that the basic priorities are upside down. I >>>>> absolutely cannot understand how the ALAC and the ALS'es can accept >>>>> such a subordinate and undignified position! Doing this is unfair >>>>> and >>> >>>>> unaccountable and just covering the real goals being pursued behind >>>>> the >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> scenes. We know all what they are like. But have no courage to speak >> >>>>> them out loudly. That's the tragedy of the at-large. >>>>> >>>>> And the results? The ALAC was not even able to advocate its own >>>>> position on domain tasting held previously. Is this a proper >>>>> advisory >>> >>>>> committee behavior? Isn't it funny? A committee that is first >>> 'advised' >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> what it should advise? Just a masquerade. >>>>> >>>>> And the classical bread and circuses. Nothing else yet. >>>>> >>>>> That is my pretty honest opinion. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Dominik >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>>> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of >>>>> Jacqueline >>> >>>>> Morris >>>>> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 4:49 PM >>>>> To: dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>>>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide >>>>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>>>> >>>>> Hey Danny >>>>> I am not ashamed at all. We have successfully managed to get ICANN >>>>> issues in the air in Trinidad and Tobago and in a large part of the >>>>> Caribbean that wasn't involved at all, thanks to this current >>>>> >>>> structure. >>>> >>>>> I think you meant to refer to the earlier "part-global" elections, >>>>> as >>> >>>>> many many Internet users were left out. We went over this a lot a >>>>> year ago. Those elections were not at all representative, IMO. So I >>>>> think your structure was not good as I think it is intrinsically >>>>> unfair to developing countries, and you think the current one is >>>>> not >>> good. >>>>> Makes no sense fighting for a structure that doesn't exist, got >>>>> scrapped and doesn't have support from at least half of the involved >>>>> >>>> users. >>>> >>>>> The logical thing is to work towards a structure that works for us >>>>> both, and stop trying to beat a very very dead cow back to life. >>>>> Jacqueline >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Danny Younger >>>>> <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> It's pathetic, and an insult to every At-Large member that voted >>>>>> in >>>>>> >>>>> the earlier global elections. You should all be ashamed. >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ALAC mailing list >>>>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.i >>>>> c >>>>> an >>>>> n >>>>> .org >>>>> >>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> ALAC mailing list >>>>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>>>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.i >>>>> c >>>>> an >>>>> n.org >>>>> >>>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders >>>> strong!) >>> >>>> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - >>>> Abraham Lincoln >>>> >>>> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is >>>> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt >>>> >>>> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; >>>> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by >>>> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." >>>> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] >>>> =============================================================== >>>> Updated 1/26/04 >>>> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. >>>> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. >>>> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail >>>> jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ica >>> nn >>> .org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ica >>> nn.org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ALAC mailing list >> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann >> .org >> >> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >> > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Outreach - Yup, need to do more..
by Robert Guerra June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

Sounds like you are referring to - outreach - something mention, I think as a key objective that ALS's and ALAC needs to be doing. In my opinion, there is much outreach still as - for the most part - most internet users have no idea that there is a space for them to learn about and participate in - the governance and policies of ICANN.. regards Robert On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM, Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> wrote: > Jacqueline, > > This is just an idea to think over. Online surveys, when massively > publicly announced, can be a very efficient means to collect large > pattern of public opinions. I know there are countries where the > Internet access is perhaps not that obvious as in developed countries; > and I am not proposing to restrict the gathering of opinions solely to > the surveys, there are also other means worth considering. But the > Internet access is widely spread nowadays and covers a large part of the > planet. > > I hope we can both agree that online surveys would be a significant > first step towards the public community. And they can be conducted on > regional level by ALSes. Other approaches can be considered in parallel, > no problem. > > Dominik > > > -----Original Message----- > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. > Morris > Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 9:01 PM > To: At-Large Worldwide > Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large > > More problems than that - how do you propose that ALL users get a chance > to participate? Web polls and such tools are not sufficient to reach the > vast majority of users in the developing world, or do you want to > continue to leave us out? > Jacqueline > Dominik Filipp wrote: >> >> As a necessary prerequisite, assume that the at-large has a voting >> power. As I already elaborated on this a little on the GA, I see one >> possibility in establishing a quantifiable public input in form of >> online surveys, straw polls, polling booths, etc. accessible to >> everyone interesting in issues upon subscription/registration to a >> specific list and possibly some other basic verification mechanisms. >> Prior to public voting there will be some sufficient room for public >> deliberation and various discussions on issues similarly as it is now >> on the lists. This, however, opens some questions, for instance, how >> to consolidate the 'public result' (gathered after counting up the >> final public survey >> votes) when it is in contradiction with a significant or apparent fact > >> questioning the effectiveness of the public result. But I think this >> is not as impassable problem as it might seem at first glance and, in >> my opinion, can be overcome. >> >> >> Dominik >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:49 PM >> To: Dominik Filipp; Jacqueline Morris; dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; >> aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov >> Cc: At-Large Worldwide; alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca; bev(a)pcna.ca; >> icann-list(a)sorehands.com; BClist(a)bizconst.org; namecritic(a)blogs.pn; >> Brenbe(a)consumer.org; bfausett(a)internet.law.pro; CWallace(a)cygnacom.com; > >> carlton.samuels(a)uwimona.edu.jm; cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au; >> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; dave(a)farber.net; denise.michel(a)icann.org; >> derek(a)aa419.org; dpefeva(a)isoc.bg; Dominik Filipp; >> elisabeth.porteneuve(a)cetp.ipsl.fr; enoss(a)tucows.com; >> frederic.teboul(a)icann.org; ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov; cgomes(a)verisign.com; >> iza(a)anr.org; jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; jefsey(a)club-internet.fr; >> jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net; kp2007(a)friscotx.com; >> matthias.langenegger(a)icann.org; mike(a)palage.com; >> michele(a)blacknight.ie; Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.us; >> jnevett(a)networksolutions.com; nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org; >> Paul.Paray(a)CNA.COM; patrick(a)vande-walle.eu; twomey(a)icann.org; >> robert(a)privaterra.org; roberto(a)icann.org; ross(a)tucows.com; >> stacy.burnette(a)icann.org; sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr; >> roessler(a)does-not-exist.org; vb(a)bertola.eu; wendy(a)seltzer.com; >> joly(a)punkcast.com >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >> >> Dominik and all, >> >> The more important problem with the ALAC and the ALS'es is that of >> accountability and transparency. >> Not only too ICANN but unto themselves. Only 15 voting members in the > >> ALAC?! How is that possible? >> How is such legitimate to users? How is such accountable to users? >> Frankly, it isn't accountable, nor ligitimate/transparent. It is of >> course *possible* if those that have the control of the servers for >> list forums and other underpennings are not themselves honest, >> transparent, and ethically accountable. >> >> If each user that is a participant of any ALS and/or the ALAC cannot > >> vote on any issue, there is little or no accountability. If any user >> that is a participant to any ALS or the ALAC cannot vote and freely >> participate on any ALS or ALAC forum uninhibited, there is little or >> no transparency nor accountability. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >>> Sent: Jun 6, 2008 8:59 AM >>> To: Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>, >>> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>> >>> Jacqueline, >>> >>> Danny is talking about principal things. The fact is that at-large in > >>> its current status should be advocating the wide user community, >>> which is over 99% of all people/bodies recognized as Internet > stakeholders. >>> The fact that this vast majority has no representative voting seats >>> is simply unacceptable, dishonesting and a failure of the commitment >>> given >>> >> >> >>> to the public community. That is, every efforts not targeted this >>> direction is just tacit collaboration in making up this cover-up and >>> an >>> >> >> >>> extension of the agony. >>> >>> The fact that you have managed something in the air is, sorry, nearly > >>> nothing in comparison to the great loss of real and representative >>> voting power. I am sorry but without this all this are just toothless > >>> toys for children playing in the sand. Jacqueline and some others, I >>> don't diminish all the efforts and the sincerity you have invested >>> into >>> >> >> >>> it but realize that the basic priorities are upside down. I >>> absolutely cannot understand how the ALAC and the ALS'es can accept >>> such a subordinate and undignified position! Doing this is unfair and > >>> unaccountable and just covering the real goals being pursued behind >>> the >>> >> >> >>> scenes. We know all what they are like. But have no courage to speak >>> them out loudly. That's the tragedy of the at-large. >>> >>> And the results? The ALAC was not even able to advocate its own >>> position on domain tasting held previously. Is this a proper advisory > >>> committee behavior? Isn't it funny? A committee that is first > 'advised' >>> >> >> >>> what it should advise? Just a masquerade. >>> >>> And the classical bread and circuses. Nothing else yet. >>> >>> That is my pretty honest opinion. >>> >>> >>> Dominik >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline > >>> Morris >>> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 4:49 PM >>> To: dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide >>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>> >>> Hey Danny >>> I am not ashamed at all. We have successfully managed to get ICANN >>> issues in the air in Trinidad and Tobago and in a large part of the >>> Caribbean that wasn't involved at all, thanks to this current >>> >> structure. >> >>> I think you meant to refer to the earlier "part-global" elections, as > >>> many many Internet users were left out. We went over this a lot a >>> year ago. Those elections were not at all representative, IMO. So I >>> think your structure was not good as I think it is intrinsically >>> unfair to developing countries, and you think the current one is not > good. >>> Makes no sense fighting for a structure that doesn't exist, got >>> scrapped and doesn't have support from at least half of the involved >>> >> users. >> >>> The logical thing is to work towards a structure that works for us >>> both, and stop trying to beat a very very dead cow back to life. >>> Jacqueline >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Danny Younger >>> <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> It's pathetic, and an insult to every At-Large member that voted in >>>> >>> the earlier global elections. You should all be ashamed. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ic >>> an >>> n >>> .org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ic >>> an >>> n.org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >> >> Regards, >> >> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) > >> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - >> Abraham Lincoln >> >> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is >> very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt >> >> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; >> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by >> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." >> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] >> =============================================================== >> Updated 1/26/04 >> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. >> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. >> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail >> jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann > .org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >

2 2

Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

Jacque, Dominik and all, Web tools reach the vast majority. Failing that, we use text based polls and voting mechnisims. They work quite well, but are not perfict. Additionally, good outreach such as burning shoe leather, is always avaliable and helpful. -----Original Message----- >From: "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> >Sent: Jun 7, 2008 12:01 PM >To: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large > >More problems than that - how do you propose that ALL users get a chance >to participate? Web polls and such tools are not sufficient to reach the >vast majority of users in the developing world, or do you want to >continue to leave us out? >Jacqueline >Dominik Filipp wrote: >> >> As a necessary prerequisite, assume that the at-large has a voting >> power. As I already elaborated on this a little on the GA, I see one >> possibility in establishing a quantifiable public input in form of >> online surveys, straw polls, polling booths, etc. accessible to everyone >> interesting in issues upon subscription/registration to a specific list >> and possibly some other basic verification mechanisms. Prior to public >> voting there will be some sufficient room for public deliberation and >> various discussions on issues similarly as it is now on the lists. This, >> however, opens some questions, for instance, how to consolidate the >> 'public result' (gathered after counting up the final public survey >> votes) when it is in contradiction with a significant or apparent fact >> questioning the effectiveness of the public result. But I think this is >> not as impassable problem as it might seem at first glance and, in my >> opinion, can be overcome. >> >> >> Dominik >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jeffrey A. Williams [mailto:jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com] >> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 11:49 PM >> To: Dominik Filipp; Jacqueline Morris; dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; >> aheineman(a)ntia.doc.gov >> Cc: At-Large Worldwide; alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca; bev(a)pcna.ca; >> icann-list(a)sorehands.com; BClist(a)bizconst.org; namecritic(a)blogs.pn; >> Brenbe(a)consumer.org; bfausett(a)internet.law.pro; CWallace(a)cygnacom.com; >> carlton.samuels(a)uwimona.edu.jm; cheryl(a)hovtek.com.au; >> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com; dave(a)farber.net; denise.michel(a)icann.org; >> derek(a)aa419.org; dpefeva(a)isoc.bg; Dominik Filipp; >> elisabeth.porteneuve(a)cetp.ipsl.fr; enoss(a)tucows.com; >> frederic.teboul(a)icann.org; ssene(a)ntia.doc.gov; cgomes(a)verisign.com; >> iza(a)anr.org; jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com; jefsey(a)club-internet.fr; >> jpalmer(a)american-webmasters.net; kp2007(a)friscotx.com; >> matthias.langenegger(a)icann.org; mike(a)palage.com; michele(a)blacknight.ie; >> Jeff.Neuman(a)neustar.us; jnevett(a)networksolutions.com; >> nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org; Paul.Paray(a)CNA.COM; patrick(a)vande-walle.eu; >> twomey(a)icann.org; robert(a)privaterra.org; roberto(a)icann.org; >> ross(a)tucows.com; stacy.burnette(a)icann.org; sebastien.bachollet(a)isoc.fr; >> roessler(a)does-not-exist.org; vb(a)bertola.eu; wendy(a)seltzer.com; >> joly(a)punkcast.com >> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >> >> Dominik and all, >> >> The more important problem with the ALAC and the ALS'es is that of >> accountability and transparency. >> Not only too ICANN but unto themselves. Only 15 voting members in the >> ALAC?! How is that possible? >> How is such legitimate to users? How is such accountable to users? >> Frankly, it isn't accountable, nor ligitimate/transparent. It is of >> course *possible* if those that have the control of the servers for list >> forums and other underpennings are not themselves honest, transparent, >> and ethically accountable. >> >> If each user that is a participant of any ALS and/or the ALAC cannot >> vote on any issue, there is little or no accountability. If any user >> that is a participant to any ALS or the ALAC cannot vote and freely >> participate on any ALS or ALAC forum uninhibited, there is little or no >> transparency nor accountability. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >>> From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp(a)dsoft.sk> >>> Sent: Jun 6, 2008 8:59 AM >>> To: Jacqueline Morris <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com>, >>> dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> >>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>> >>> Jacqueline, >>> >>> Danny is talking about principal things. The fact is that at-large in >>> its current status should be advocating the wide user community, which >>> is over 99% of all people/bodies recognized as Internet stakeholders. >>> The fact that this vast majority has no representative voting seats is >>> simply unacceptable, dishonesting and a failure of the commitment given >>> >> >> >>> to the public community. That is, every efforts not targeted this >>> direction is just tacit collaboration in making up this cover-up and an >>> >> >> >>> extension of the agony. >>> >>> The fact that you have managed something in the air is, sorry, nearly >>> nothing in comparison to the great loss of real and representative >>> voting power. I am sorry but without this all this are just toothless >>> toys for children playing in the sand. Jacqueline and some others, I >>> don't diminish all the efforts and the sincerity you have invested into >>> >> >> >>> it but realize that the basic priorities are upside down. I absolutely >>> cannot understand how the ALAC and the ALS'es can accept such a >>> subordinate and undignified position! Doing this is unfair and >>> unaccountable and just covering the real goals being pursued behind the >>> >> >> >>> scenes. We know all what they are like. But have no courage to speak >>> them out loudly. That's the tragedy of the at-large. >>> >>> And the results? The ALAC was not even able to advocate its own >>> position on domain tasting held previously. Is this a proper advisory >>> committee behavior? Isn't it funny? A committee that is first 'advised' >>> >> >> >>> what it should advise? Just a masquerade. >>> >>> And the classical bread and circuses. Nothing else yet. >>> >>> That is my pretty honest opinion. >>> >>> >>> Dominik >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline >>> Morris >>> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2008 4:49 PM >>> To: dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com >>> Cc: At-Large Worldwide >>> Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large >>> >>> Hey Danny >>> I am not ashamed at all. We have successfully managed to get ICANN >>> issues in the air in Trinidad and Tobago and in a large part of the >>> Caribbean that wasn't involved at all, thanks to this current >>> >> structure. >> >>> I think you meant to refer to the earlier "part-global" elections, as >>> many many Internet users were left out. We went over this a lot a year >>> ago. Those elections were not at all representative, IMO. So I think >>> your structure was not good as I think it is intrinsically unfair to >>> developing countries, and you think the current one is not good. >>> Makes no sense fighting for a structure that doesn't exist, got >>> scrapped and doesn't have support from at least half of the involved >>> >> users. >> >>> The logical thing is to work towards a structure that works for us >>> both, and stop trying to beat a very very dead cow back to life. >>> Jacqueline >>> >>> On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 10:35 AM, Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>>> It's pathetic, and an insult to every At-Large member that voted in >>>> >>> the earlier global elections. You should all be ashamed. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ican >>> n >>> .org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ALAC mailing list >>> ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >>> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ican >>> n.org >>> >>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >>> >> >> Regards, >> >> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) >> "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - >> Abraham Lincoln >> >> "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very >> often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt >> >> "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; >> liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by >> P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." >> United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] >> =============================================================== >> Updated 1/26/04 >> CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. >> div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. >> ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail >> jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >ALAC mailing list >ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org > >At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1(a)ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Who's ashamed?
by Dominik Filipp June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

If, however, this happened the situation would at least get clarified finally. ICANN would become an organization top-down driven by the board and two registry/registrar constituencies. Without necessary ballast. By the way, the current 15 ALAC members are at least five times more than active GA members :-)) Dominik -----Original Message----- From: JFC Morfin [mailto:jefsey@jefsey.com] Sent: Saturday, June 07, 2008 3:07 PM To: Dominik Filipp; Evan Leibovitch Cc: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] Who's ashamed? At 13:12 07/06/2008, Dominik Filipp wrote: >An example could be the approval of the Verisign agreement that in fact >cements the Verisign's monopoly on the .com market for a long time, >which, of course, is far away from public interests. As you know, one could claim that the ALAC is a way to strangle the DNSO/GA who motionned against that agreement and has been set-up in a way this cannot happen again. When ALAC becomes too "active" the solution is to redowngrade it to the GA level. 15 ALAC members are roughly the equivalent of the GA Membership, with similar influence. jfc

2 1

Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france@large
by Jeffrey A. Williams June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

Jacque, JFC, and all, JFC is right to a great extent. ICANN has and continues to practice exclusion and inclusion under false pretense, IMO and an opinion that seems to be borne out by the overwhelming documented evidance. It appears to me, as it seems it appears to JFC that the ALAC is doing the very same thing. Such is commonly known as a "Club mantality". Nothing wrong with Clubs, but if so recognized and eternalized by ICANN, than just be plain and say so. I for one see nothing wrong with France having it's own country centric @large. If the ALAC does not embrace such, nor ICANN, than they can't be acting in an inclusive manner by act and/or lack there of. -----Original Message----- >From: JFC Morfin <jefsey(a)jefsey.com> >Sent: Jun 7, 2008 10:48 AM >To: jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com >Cc: alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france@large > >At 14:27 07/06/2008, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: > >>Crime?? >>This sort of language is getting beyond the pale. You deliberately >>distort and misunderstand and then accuse people of committing >>crimes. That requires an apology and retraction. > >No. I am using a technical word (commiting something wrong) >http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/crime >in its technical meaning to quote a basic principle of the right: >Nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans. >no one is heeded who adduces his own infamy >(No one is heard when alleging one's own wrong) > >I know that ICANN and ALAC can claim to be an exception, but UN says: >"The principle of nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans is >applied in most legal systems and prevents anyone asserting a right >acquired by fraud." > >What is worrying is that the use of your inaccurate reading can >either be taken as: >- polemic where there is only technicality. Why? >- dilatory, making you a party of the wrong caused to france@large, >and adding to it. >- an acknowledgment of the degree of the caused wrong. Then I would >thank you for that. It is true that ALAC endangers its own crediblity >in acting in the way it did. This is why I wish to play it low key >for now, permitting honnest ALAC Members to realise what they did and >honnest Internet @large/people to understand what was made by their >"representatives" on their behalf. Frankly I do not know any worst >crime in a network than exclusion, except exclusion on false pretence. >jfc > >>Jacqueline >>JFC Morfin wrote: >>>Dear Jacqueline, >>>You cannot benefit from your own crimes. ALAC cannot use against us >>>rules they violated to our detriment. Until the case can be settled >>>in appeal no one can claim as you do (without adding to the crime) that: >>> >>>1) france@large is not an accedited ALS since May 13th. >>>2) that I was not or Louis was not a legitimate candidate to be >>>elected at the ALAC by Euralo >>>3) that I have/he has not been elected in due time to vote for an >>>ALAC/BoD liaison. >>>4) that as such I cannot nominate Sebastien or that Louis cannot >>>nominate me as a Liaison to the BoD. >>> >>>At 16:04 06/06/2008, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote: >>>>ALAC and the At Large are different things. >>> >>>Correct. You are not ALAC. We are French Internet @larges. >>> >>>>ALAC is a committee with 2/3 of its members elected by the regional >>>>groupings of ALSes. So if one is a representative of an ALS, then one >>>>can stand for election in one's region for a position of ALAC member for >>>>that region. No-one can join or enter ALAC except through this >>>>mechanism or via the other 1/3 NomCom appointees to ALAC. >>> >>>Perfectly true. See above. The nomination I made was explicitly >>>conditional as per above. >>> >>>>The At Large is the mass of ALSes and their members, all the users, etc. >>> >>>Correct. You select them, I serve them. >>> >>>>They are represented at the Committee level by 10 representatives on the >>>>ALAC. (2 from each region) >>> >>>We are not since these people voted that we do not exist. >>> >>>>To join the At Large officially, one can >>>>apply via one's regional organisation (RALO). Each RALO has slightly >>>>different rules. The RALO advises on each applicant and the ALAC votes. >>>>Staff has no vote or say in this process. Their job is to do research on >>>>the candidates, making sure that what they say on the application form >>>>is verifiable and correct. >>> >>>In existing we verify that Staff reported uncorrectly. It is up to >>>the appeal decision to correct this as fas as ICANN is concerned. >>>As far as we are concerned we know we exist and legitimately behave as such. >>> >>>Currently, our appeal is delayed by Staff. We do not fully the >>>English draft we received, the Ombudsman declined to speed up the >>>case in translating it for us. As such, by its consequence Staff is >>>also adding to the crime. >>> >>>>So a lot of what france@large representatives on this list have been >>>>saying is flat out wrong. >>> >>>(1) you say here something you are not entitled to say. >>>(2) you hurt the ALAC position in showing that your interests might >>>benefit from our situation while it is wrong. >>> >>>>I hope this clears it up and we can stop having all these emails >>>>flying back and forth based on misunderstanding of the rules that >>>>the RALOs and ALAC adopted to govern the At Large in ICANN. >>> >>>I do hope the same. >>>Until the case is administratively settled, france@large intends to >>>make its legitimate rights protected. >>>This being said, we all know this is a purely political issue. >>> >>>Cheers ! >>>jfc >>> >>> >>>>Jacqueline >>>> >>>>JFC Morfin wrote: >>>> > This is why I personnally pushed them to welcome ICANN and enter ALAC. >> >>

1 0

ALAC and AtLarge and france at large
by Danny Younger June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

The real problem, of course, is the current perverted definition of the at-large. Since early 1999 the operative definition was "At-large membership should primarily represent those individuals and organizations that are not represented by the Supporting Organizations (SOs)." -- see the Memembership Advisory Committee (MAC) documents. As non-commercial organizations are represented within the SOs, namely by way of the NCUC, they are, by definition, not the at-large (which is supposed to be primarily the home of individuals). You have chosen to accept a perversion formulated after at-large directors were expelled from the Board instead of that which was broadly accepted by the wider community. In doing so, you have abandoned the clearly stated goals of the at-large, namely: "The goals of the at-large membership are as follows: (a) to include any Internet user with access and verifiable identity in order to reflect the global diversity of users (membership should not be limited to IP address or domain name holders), (b) to elect Directors to the ICANN Board by procedures that are valid and authentic, (c) to ensure that ICANN�s corporate structure operates for the benefit of the Internet community as a whole, is not captured, and continues to provide fair and proportional representation of the entire user community, (d) to provide input from the user community to the ICANN Directors and (e) to do so in a cost-efficient manner." So, what steps has your "pretend At-Large" taken to secure voting representation on the ICANN Board of Directors? None whatsoever. It's pathetic, and an insult to every At-Large member that voted in the earlier global elections. You should all be ashamed.

6 10

CONFIRMED: new gTLD Briefing Session 11 June 1330 UTC
by At-Large Staff June 7, 2008

June 7, 2008

Dear all, The Briefing Session on ICANN¹s new gTLD program will be on Wednesday, 11 June at 1330 UTC. Ms. Karla Valente, from ICANN¹s new gTLD program and Mr. Olof Nordling, Manager of Policy Development Coordination will give a presentation on the new gTLD programme, including an update on the staff implementation planning. The briefing is designed to focus on the programme from an Internet end-users¹ perspective; members of GNSO constituencies are being invited to join the briefing. Subsequently, they will be available to answer some of your questions, both about the GNSO Policy presented to the Board and the implementation planning for the programme. Please visit the meeting page to find participation instructions and reference material for this presentation. https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?briefing_session_on_new_gtld_programme We will soon upload Karla Valente¹s PowerPoint presentation to the meeting page and you will also be able to follow the presentation in real time, chat and ask questions using the Adobe Connect meeting room for this presentation. The Adobe Connect link is also on the meeting page. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Matthias Langenegger, Frederic Teboul ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff(a)atlarge.icann.org

1 0