February 2017 - At-Large - lists.icann.org

Fwd: Re: [Chapter-delegates] New version of ICANN At-Large Review - ISOC Chapters role and future
by Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond April 6, 2017

April 6, 2017

Dear all, FYI -- a response from me, to a thread that came up on the ISOC Chapter leaders mailing list. The topic is specifically the downgrading of At-Large Structures by equalling them to individual membership. With many chapters as At-Large Structures, the Internet Society Chapters would be affected. BTW -- as part of the At-Large Review working group, I submitted over 100 comments on the original document that was presented by the consultants to the Review working group. It appears that most of my comments were ignored. I plan to comment further - when I find the time to do so - and would be happy to contribute to an ALAC comment. Kindest regards, Olivier ps. I admit that I am one of the "big-mouthed" people. :-) -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] New version of ICANN At-Large Review - ISOC Chapters role and future Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 01:37:05 +0100 From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl(a)gih.com> To: Alejandro Pisanty <apisanty(a)gmail.com>, Richard Hill <rhill(a)hill-a.ch> CC: ISOC Chapter Delegates <chapter-delegates(a)elists.isoc.org> On 04/02/2017 21:01, Alejandro Pisanty wrote: > Problems like capture by a few individuals will not be solved and in > fact most likely will be aggravated by the "enhanced membership model." The Review carries anonymous quotes from people who dislike the fact that At-Large and the ALAC are standing in their way to turn ICANN into a domain name business association. Bringing the input of Internet end users to ICANN's technically and legally super-complex processes is a very hard task indeed. I know - I chaired that process for 4 years and to say that it was challenging is an understatement. But the current structure of At-Large which has several tiers for hierarchy of "control" but an entirely open bottom-up model where everybody is allowed to attend any meeting or call and to participate and to voice their opinion, actually provides for a stable environment with stable processes which can actually help in reaching consensus and getting the ALAC to act. That is exactly the thing that bothers other parts of ICANN: that the ALAC is slowly but surely, over time, surmounting the largest hurdle to a multi-stakeholder system which is to get the input of the real end users out there - and that it is doing so with renewed harmony and proven bottom-up processes. Instead, as Alejandro mentions, the Review asks for a return to an unstable, free for all, system based only on individual members speaking for themselves only, a system that was shown to fail miserably as it generates conflict with no safeguards whatsoever and favours those with a bigger mouth than anyone else. The ICANN version 1 experiment failed noticeably in the early 2000s, with ballot stuffing in wide practice and mailing lists that were filled with flame wars fuelled by socio-paths. I remember that so well: having been subscribed to the early DNSO (Domain Name Support Association) mailing list, I quickly got sick of the daily dose of venom from psychos that should have been interned, un-subscribed myself and, after the failed At-Large elections which I predicted were going to fail, removed myself completely from having anything to do with ICANN until it had a meeting in Paris in 2008. The Review is deeply flawed in that it is not an analysis of At-Large and the ALAC. On the contrary, it is a collection of opinions, many of them deeply flawed or factually wrong, and recommendations derived from these flawed opinions. Good opinions of At-Large were ditched and only criticism was kept, whether warranted or unwarranted. It is a lynching of reality and I give it as much truth as the flawed populist campaigns the world has recently seen, thus predicting an equally gruesome future for At-Large. By following the mantra "Let's make At-Large great again", the reviewers are actually proposing to kill it. Kindest regards, Olivier (own opinions) _______________________________________________ As an Internet Society Chapter Officer you are automatically subscribed to this list, which is regularly synchronized with the Internet Society Chapter Portal (AMS): https://portal.isoc.org

7 6

León Felipe Sánchez Ambía Selected by the At-Large Community as the Next ICANN Board Director
by Program Admin Feb. 28, 2017

Feb. 28, 2017

On behalf of Tijani Ben Jemaa, Chair of the Board Member Selection Process Committee (BMSPC), we are announcing the final election result of ICANN Board Director (Seat #15) selected by the At-Large Community. After six months of efforts, the At-Large Community has successfully concluded its ICANN Board Director selection process on 27 February 2017. León Felipe Sánchez Ambía has been selected by At-Large as the successor of Rinalia Abdul Rahm and will begin his 3 year term as an ICANN Board Director at the end of ICANN60 (3 November 2017). The selection process began in September 2016, with the formation of two committees<https://community.icann.org/x/Vxi4Aw> tasked with managing the timeline, calling for and evaluating the candidates, and organizing the final election. Among the six individuals who submitted Expressions of Interest for the position, Alan Greenberg and León Felipe Sánchez Ambía were chosen as the finalists<https://community.icann.org/x/N6bDAw>. Before the election took place, the At-Large Community enjoyed ample opportunities to ask questions to the finalists verbally<https://community.icann.org/x/-pXRAw> and in writing<https://community.icann.org/x/ArXDAw> in order to make an informed choice. At-Large Structures also participated in the final election<https://community.icann.org/x/SbbDAw> by directing the votes of Regional At-Large Organization Chairs<https://community.icann.org/x/-ZfRAw>. Click here<https://community.icann.org/x/SbbDAw> to review the result, as well as the detailed information about the election process. Please see below the bio and photo of León Felipe Sánchez Ambía. [cid:image001.png@01D290DC.AA3412F0] León Felipe Sánchez Ambía is an intellectual property attorney graduated from the the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM). He also has completed postgraduate studies on intellectual property at the UNAM and on Internet Law at Harvard Law School. Since 2006 he has been partner at Fulton & Fulton, a law firm specialized in intellectual property and IT law based in Mexico City, and is head of the Intellectual Property division. In 2008 he was admitted as professor on Intellectual Property at the UNAM Law School. He is co-lead for the Mexican chapter of Creative Commons and advisor to different Government bodies that include the Digital Strategy Coordination Office of the Mexican Presidency, the Special Commission on Digital Agenda and IT of the Mexican House of Representatives and the Science and Technology Commission of the Mexican Senate. He drafted the Internet Users Rights Protection Act for Mexico and has been very active on issues like Anti-Counterfeit Trade Agreement (ACTA), Stop Online Privacy Act (SOPA), Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) and other local initiatives of the same kind, always advocating to defend users’ and creators’ rights in order to achieve a balance between regulation and freedom. He currently serves as the ALAC Vice-Chair in ICANN and Co-Chair of the CCWG on Accountability where he has been deeply involved with the IANA transition. Heidi Ullrich, Ariel Liang, and Yesim Nazlar At-Large Board Member Selection Program Admin Staff

21 20

Unsubscribe me please
by Alexander Forsyth Feb. 26, 2017

Feb. 26, 2017

Thank you. Alexander Forsyth www.campominado.org <https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/d0c0b46552958ac65c076711d0d4ddd3caa71b4e?ur…> www.alexanderforsyth.com <https://mailtrack.io/trace/link/8a984b2a36df1d485c9aa65deaa140e357963ab3?ur…>

27 45

unsuscribe me please
by 陈佳伟 Feb. 26, 2017

Feb. 26, 2017

Unsuscribe me please.Thanks.

1 0

Spam filters
by Roberto Gaetano Feb. 24, 2017

Feb. 24, 2017

Hi all. Just to let you know that I have updated my junk mail filters and any message with "unsubscribe" in the header will get due attention and proper processing. Cheers, R

1 0

Unsubscribe me please
by Zdenko Seligo Feb. 24, 2017

Feb. 24, 2017

*Zdenko Seligo*Abogado Av. Venezuela, Torre Asociación Bancaria de Venezuela, Piso 4, Ofic. No. 42, Urb. El Rosal, Caracas 1060. República Bolivariana de Venezuela. Telfs. Ofic.: + 58 212 954.02.08 / 954.09.58 Fax: + 58 212 952.39.26 Telfs. Celulares: + 58 / 412.220.22.02 / 414.032.60.10 Sitio web: www.zdenkoseligo.com <http://www.zdenkoseligo.com> Blog: www.zdenkoseligo.blogspot.com http://twitter.com/ZdenkoSeligo *Advertencia Constitucional y Legal*: Los artículos 1 y 4 del Decreto con Fuerza de Ley sobre Mensajes de Datos y Firmas Electrónicas, otorgan y reconocen eficacia y valor jurídico a este e-mail, el cual se encuentra protegido por el artículo 60 de la Constitución, el artículo 22 de la Ley Especial Contra los Delitos Informáticos y por el secreto profesional abogado-cliente, según lo establecido en los artículos 25 y 26 del Código de Ética Profesional del Abogado Venezolano y el artículo 61 de la Ley de Abogados.

3 2

Weekly posting summary for at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
by narten＠us.ibm.com Feb. 24, 2017

Feb. 24, 2017

Total of 82 messages in the last 7 days. script run at: Fri Feb 24 00:53:35 EST 2017 Messages | Bytes | Who --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 15.85% | 13 | 16.07% | 270329 | gbruen at knujon.com 4.88% | 4 | 6.91% | 116291 | roberto_gaetano at hotmail.com 6.10% | 5 | 4.31% | 72446 | joly at punkcast.com 3.66% | 3 | 5.31% | 89294 | maureen.hilyard at gmail.com 3.66% | 3 | 5.23% | 88047 | javrua at gmail.com 2.44% | 2 | 4.78% | 80387 | apisan at unam.mx 3.66% | 3 | 3.27% | 55084 | seun.ojedeji at gmail.com 2.44% | 2 | 3.99% | 67186 | vanda at scartezini.org 3.66% | 3 | 2.52% | 42353 | carlton.samuels at gmail.com 2.44% | 2 | 3.18% | 53422 | h.raiche at internode.on.net 2.44% | 2 | 2.90% | 48712 | michele at blacknight.com 2.44% | 2 | 2.15% | 36136 | apisanty at gmail.com 2.44% | 2 | 1.94% | 32679 | bummel at kdun.org 2.44% | 2 | 1.76% | 29585 | zdenko.seligo at gmail.com 2.44% | 2 | 1.60% | 26865 | bashar at kuwaitnet.com 2.44% | 2 | 1.43% | 24056 | ocl at gih.com 2.44% | 2 | 1.38% | 23275 | julf at julf.com 2.44% | 2 | 1.29% | 21696 | karl at cavebear.com 1.22% | 1 | 2.42% | 40651 | otuenehoj at danelec-ltd.com 1.22% | 1 | 2.35% | 39529 | jlaprise at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 2.21% | 37177 | program-admin at atlarge.icann.org 1.22% | 1 | 2.03% | 34119 | andrei at iotas.ru 1.22% | 1 | 1.74% | 29254 | erik at huesca.mx 1.22% | 1 | 1.72% | 29017 | kankaili at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 1.69% | 28475 | devtee at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 1.54% | 25964 | at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org 1.22% | 1 | 1.49% | 25008 | mail at christopherwilkinson.eu 1.22% | 1 | 1.39% | 23405 | judith at jhellerstein.com 1.22% | 1 | 1.38% | 23220 | remmyn at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 1.02% | 17191 | veronicacretu at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.94% | 15731 | b.schombe at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.85% | 14279 | thompson.darlene at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.80% | 13482 | otieno.barrack at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.72% | 12049 | w.yu at gmx.net 1.22% | 1 | 0.68% | 11497 | karlenef at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.67% | 11270 | narten at us.ibm.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.65% | 10938 | alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca 1.22% | 1 | 0.63% | 10647 | laith.hamad at accesspartnership.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.57% | 9659 | seth.reiss at lex-ip.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.57% | 9513 | aforsyth.pdp at gmail.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.53% | 8933 | johnl at iecc.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.48% | 8027 | jaap at nlnetlabs.nl 1.22% | 1 | 0.47% | 7939 | bzs at theworld.com 1.22% | 1 | 0.45% | 7580 | tom at connecting.nyc --------+------+--------+----------+------------------------ 100.00% | 82 |100.00% | 1682397 | Total

1 0

Re: [At-Large] Unsubscribe me please
by Carlton Samuels Feb. 22, 2017

Feb. 22, 2017

...I so feel your pain! I like talking f2f....and reading body language. -Carlton ============================== *Carlton A Samuels* *Mobile: 876-818-1799Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround* ============================= On Mon, Feb 20, 2017 at 4:35 PM, Seth M Reiss <seth.reiss(a)lex-ip.com> wrote: > There used to be two of us on this small Island, and he was good at talking > over a beer, but then he (Randal) left :( > > -----Original Message----- > From: at-large-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Karl > Auerbach > Sent: Monday, February 20, 2017 11:12 AM > To: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond > Cc: At-Large Worldwide > Subject: Re: [At-Large] Unsubscribe me please > > This is an interesting thread. However, it tends to express solutions that > are all based on technology. > > It has been my experience that technical means of communication work best > when they are punctuated by actual face-to-face meetings. Now, I do not > mean grand and glorious jet-setting meetings but, rather, informal, > self-organized get-togethers of people in two's, three's, ... > even a dozen. > > This kind of face-to-face this is important. It is pretty amazing what > people can do when they get past the friction and propensity to misconstrue > that comes with electronic communications. > > So whatever might be done electronically, I suggest that people consider > meet one another for coffee of a beer and just chat. Just possibly that > chat might give rise to a solution to some hard problem. Or it might > create > an understanding that lets us step back from the tensions of electronic > communications and say to ourselves - "I have met that > person, I know that he/she is intelligent and well intentioned. > Perhaps our disagreement arises out of misunderstanding one another's words > rather than something of irreconcilable substance." > > For example, any one of us could put up a flag - as a tweet or an email or > facebook post - and say something like "Hey, folks, I'm happy to meet with > anyone in the area for coffee or lunch, just drop me a note a xxxx and > let's > see if we can get together." > > I realize that this is not a useful option for those of us who are not in > population centers, on islands, or others who would find informal, largely > unfocused, small meetings to be expensive or inconvenient. But consider > that in our new era that we might look for several, overlapping, sometimes > informal means of interaction rather than some single all-encompassing > engine. > > --karl-- > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus > > _______________________________________________ > At-Large mailing list > At-Large(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large > > At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org >

10 10

Re: [At-Large] Unsubscribe me please
by Holly Raiche Feb. 21, 2017

Feb. 21, 2017

Hi Garth That isn’t sarcastic - it’s sad. I am not talking about a big grand plan. I am talking about a discussion on the lists - what are they, who uses them, is there a better way. It could be a simple as eliminating one of the lists, or better labelling the lists, or simply putting a better subject heading. Please let’s not step away from what may be small reforms because we have decided it is all too hard, and ICANN will can it. Holly On 20 Feb 2017, at 7:58 am, Gbruen <gbruen(a)knujon.com> wrote: > Holly, > > This is going to sound sarcastic but it is simply factual. Me, Seun, and everyone else could collaborate and come up with a great plan and as soon as we try to move forward it will be taken over by some icann division and either get shelved, bloated, or made ineffective. This has already happened several time before with too many at-large projects. > > -Garth > > > Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE Droid > On Feb 19, 2017 2:34 PM, Holly Raiche <h.raiche(a)internode.on.net> wrote: > Folks > > A great discussion on this list - making some really important points. So instead of letting the matter drop (as is so often the case), make this an item for discussion at CPH - and allow plenty of time. How do we communicate, can we do better and how. > > So maybe review what some of us know - what are the lists, how are they used (or not), when people unsubscribe, do we try to find out why, is there a better way to communicate - by topic? And Dev, Garth, Seun and everyone - could there be a page or so - to that list and staff, saying this is a better way and this is how to do it. > > We are starting the Review comments - and how we communicate (and how we could do it better) is clearly something that should be one of the top items on that agenda. So let’s actually make our communications structures better rather than just complain > > Thanks everyone > > Holly > On 20 Feb 2017, at 4:57 am, Roberto Gaetano <roberto_gaetano(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > Oh good, then we can agree. > R > > > Da: gbruen(a)knujon.com [mailto:gbruen@knujon.com] > Inviato: domenica 19 febbraio 2017 18:55 > A: Roberto Gaetano > Cc:

11 10

Re: [At-Large] Unsubscribe me please
by Gbruen Feb. 20, 2017

Feb. 20, 2017

1 0