- At-Large - lists.icann.org

Re: [At-Large] [EURO-Discuss] [Secretariat] At-Large EURALO 2007Election Results
by Roberto Gaetano May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Jeanette, > > I would also like to congratulate Veronica and Sebastien. And > I I'd like to thank you for the votes I got for the EURALO > board. I must concede it feels quite odd though to be elected > through an election process I find not acceptable and to now > participate in an organization that I think should be > structured in a completely different way. Maybe this is one of the merit of the inclusiveness of this process? It is true that you don't see often that. However, by its very nature, the process of getting together internet users quite naturally allows confrontation among widely diverse opinions. And I do believe that one of the richnesses of the ALAC is to make this happen. Now you are faced with pretty much the same queston I have been faced when elected Chairman of the DNSO General Assembly years ago: is my mandate to try to make the people who elected me more "powerful" in the organization, in terms of giving more weight to their voices, or try to change the structure to make it fit better with my ideals? In the beginning, I was sure to be able to do both at the same time. Later, I found I had to make a tough choice. Younger generations have biologically the ability to do better than the previous ones: in this spirit I wish you better luck. But my advice would be still to do what you feel is better for the user community you represent. Cheers, Roberto

1 0

Re: [At-Large] NCUC and MoU orgs?
by Jacqueline A. Morris May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Hi Milton Sorry - I probably misunderstood Danny's comment that "NCUC Charter deems ineligible those organizations that provide services under MoU with ICANN." I took it in the context of his email to mean that the charter prohibited being both an ALS/RALO member and a NCUC member. If there is room for discussion and clarification - that's great (it's what I understood in Lisbon, and why we've created an ALAC/NCUC liaison.) and we can and should go ahead with our action item to become more closely linked. BTW- ALSes don't HAVE to sign the MoU, but RALO members do. Sorry again - my tone had more to do with being tired than with anything else. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 1:46 PM To: 'Luc Faubert'; 'Roberto Gaetano'; Jacqueline Morris; 'Alan Greenberg'; 'Danny Younger' Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide'; 'NA Discuss'; carlosaguirre62(a)hotmail.com Subject: Re: NCUC and MoU orgs? I don't see how you can say "that's that". I told Danny that there is nothing necessarily preventing an organization from being in ALAC and NCUC at the same time. There is some ambiguity about being an ALS at the same time. But the interpretation of the NCUC charter provision is not entirely clear in this case. The charter provision was intended to prevent NCUC members from having a conflict of interest; if they are paid by and accountable to ICANN the organization it is not suitable for them to also be independently formulating policy that governs ICANN. It is not clear to me that ALS's are paid by and accountable to ICANN; they also may be intended to be independent policy formulation bodies. It's not clear. >>> "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> 5/22/2007 1:17 PM >>> Ok So that's that unless the NCUC changes its charter... it's either/or. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:18 AM To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Luc Faubert'; 'Alan Greenberg' Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide'; 'NA Discuss' Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application Hi Roberto, If Communautique (as an org of orgs) will not meet the ALS criteria per the ICANN bylaws, then why leave them out in the cold? It would certainly be better to suggest to them that they can possibly find a home in the NCUC. With regard to "nothing prevents both things to happen at the same time", that may not be true. In fact, I am currently in discussions with Milton Mueller over this issue as the NCUC Charter deems ineligible those organizations that provide services under MoU with ICANN. --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto(a)icann.org> wrote: > Because, as noted half a million times already, the > NCUC is a constituency > of the GNSO, while the ALAC is an Advisory Committee > of the Board, and they > have two distinct roles. Therefore, it would be up > to the organization > itself to decide whether they want to have a > (voting) position, limited to > GNSO matters, or a (advisory, non voting) position, > related to the whole > spectrum of ICANN activities. Of course, nothing > prevents both things to > happen at the same time. > > Incidentally, may I note that, to the best of my > knowledge, nobody ever went > to the NCUC list to suggest that current members of > that constituency move > *instead* to ALAC, even if most of them would indeed > qualify. > > Feel free to forward to NA discuss. > > Cheers, > Roberto > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On > Behalf Of > > Danny Younger > > Sent: 22 May 2007 15:21 > > To: Luc Faubert; Alan Greenberg > > Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss > > Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO > vote for > > TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application > > > > So why not do the right thing and refer them > instead to the > > Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)? > > > > > > --- Luc Faubert <LFaubert(a)conceptum.ca> wrote: > > > > > Alan, > > > > > > Thanks for you thorough reply. I appreciate. > > > > > > >From what I understand of the history behind > the > > > wording to the effect that orgs certified as > ALSes should be > > > user-driven, it was meant as a protection > against lobbying > > groups. It > > > would be a shame if this kept legitimate orgs of > orgs out of the > > > process, as these are sometimes the only orgs > with the > > human resources > > > to invest in the demanding task of following > ICANN-related > > activites. > > > > > > Let's hope ALAC can clear things up before long, > as another org of > > > orgs from Canada has applied for certification > > (Communautique, an org > > > a bit like TC in French-speaking Québec). > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________ > > > Luc Faubert > > > Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du > changement / IT > > > governance and change management consulting > > > +1 514 236 5129 > > > www.LucFaubert.com > > > www.LucFaubert.com/blog > > > www.isoc.qc.ca > > > www.ccig.ca > > > www.uqbm.qc.ca > > > www.maillons.qc.ca > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > ______________________ > > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate > > in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. > > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ALAC mailing list > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-l > ists.icann.org > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org > > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org > > ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 _______________________________________________ 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://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM

1 0

Re: [At-Large] NCUC and MoU orgs?
by Roberto Gaetano May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Milton, You might want to give a try to convince Danny that after all, ALAC and NCUC are natural allies and it would be better to have a common strategy instead of making it difficult to coexist. You might be aware that Karen Banks, past representative of NCUC, is now in the Board of EURALO. ALAC does not raise any problem in her playing a leadership role in both parts of the organization (provided that we remain within the Bylaws). We (ALAC and NCUC) are on the minority side in a struggle that sees commercial interests outnumber our forces: I am always convinced that a conflict between ALAC and NCUC would only have the effect of render both weaker and less effective. Cheers, Roberto > -----Original Message----- > From: Milton Mueller [mailto:Mueller@syr.edu] > Sent: 22 May 2007 19:46 > To: 'Luc Faubert'; 'Roberto Gaetano'; Jacqueline Morris; > 'Alan Greenberg'; 'Danny Younger' > Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide'; 'NA Discuss'; carlosaguirre62(a)hotmail.com > Subject: Re: NCUC and MoU orgs? > > I don't see how you can say "that's that". I told Danny that > there is nothing necessarily preventing an organization from > being in ALAC and NCUC at the same time. There is some > ambiguity about being an ALS at the same time. But the > interpretation of the NCUC charter provision is not entirely > clear in this case. The charter provision was intended to > prevent NCUC members from having a conflict of interest; if > they are paid by and accountable to ICANN the organization it > is not suitable for them to also be independently formulating > policy that governs ICANN. It is not clear to me that ALS's > are paid by and accountable to ICANN; they also may be > intended to be independent policy formulation bodies. It's not clear. > > >>> "Jacqueline A. Morris" <jam(a)jacquelinemorris.com> > 5/22/2007 1:17 PM > >>> >>> > Ok > So that's that unless the NCUC changes its charter... it's either/or. > Jacqueline > > -----Original Message----- > From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:18 AM > To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Luc Faubert'; 'Alan Greenberg' > Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide'; 'NA Discuss' > Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for > TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application > > Hi Roberto, > > If Communautique (as an org of orgs) will not meet the ALS > criteria per the ICANN bylaws, then why leave them out in the > cold? It would certainly be better to suggest to them that > they can possibly find a home in the NCUC. > > With regard to "nothing prevents both things to happen at the > same time", that may not be true. In fact, I am currently in > discussions with Milton Mueller over this issue as the NCUC > Charter deems ineligible those organizations that provide > services under MoU with ICANN. > > > --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto(a)icann.org> wrote: > > > Because, as noted half a million times already, the > > NCUC is a constituency > > of the GNSO, while the ALAC is an Advisory Committee > > of the Board, and they > > have two distinct roles. Therefore, it would be up > > to the organization > > itself to decide whether they want to have a > > (voting) position, limited to > > GNSO matters, or a (advisory, non voting) position, > > related to the whole > > spectrum of ICANN activities. Of course, nothing > > prevents both things to > > happen at the same time. > > > > Incidentally, may I note that, to the best of my > > knowledge, nobody ever went > > to the NCUC list to suggest that current members of > > that constituency move > > *instead* to ALAC, even if most of them would indeed > > qualify. > > > > Feel free to forward to NA discuss. > > > > Cheers, > > Roberto > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: alac-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On > > Behalf Of > > > Danny Younger > > > Sent: 22 May 2007 15:21 > > > To: Luc Faubert; Alan Greenberg > > > Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss > > > Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO > > vote for > > > TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application > > > > > > So why not do the right thing and refer them > > instead to the > > > Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)? > > > > > > > > > --- Luc Faubert <LFaubert(a)conceptum.ca> wrote: > > > > > > > Alan, > > > > > > > > Thanks for you thorough reply. I appreciate. > > > > > > > > >From what I understand of the history behind > > the > > > > wording to the effect that orgs certified as > > ALSes should be > > > > user-driven, it was meant as a protection > > against lobbying > > > groups. It > > > > would be a shame if this kept legitimate orgs of > > orgs out of the > > > > process, as these are sometimes the only orgs > > with the > > > human resources > > > > to invest in the demanding task of following > > ICANN-related > > > activites. > > > > > > > > Let's hope ALAC can clear things up before long, > > as another org of > > > > orgs from Canada has applied for certification > > > (Communautique, an org > > > > a bit like TC in French-speaking Québec). > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > _________________________________________ > > > > Luc Faubert > > > > Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du > > changement / IT > > > > governance and change management consulting > > > > +1 514 236 5129 > > > > www.LucFaubert.com > > > > www.LucFaubert.com/blog > > > > www.isoc.qc.ca > > > > www.ccig.ca > > > > www.uqbm.qc.ca > > > > www.maillons.qc.ca > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > > > ______________________ > > > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate > > > in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. > > > > > > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > ALAC mailing list > > > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > > > > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-l > > ists.icann.org > > > > > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org > > > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org > > > > > > > > > ______________________________________________________________ > ______________ > ________ > Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate > in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. > http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 > > _______________________________________________ > ALAC mailing list > ALAC(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-l > ists.icann.org > > At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org > ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release > Date: 5/21/2007 > 2:01 PM > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release > Date: 5/21/2007 > 2:01 PM > >

1 0

Request for Public Comments and Dialogue on ICANN's Performance
by Alan Greenberg May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Request for Public Comments and Dialogue on ICANN's Performance http://www.icann.org/announcements/announcement-08may07.htm 8 May 2007 As part of an ongoing interest in continuous improvement, ICANN is seeking community feedback about its performance. All responses are welcome. Targeted comments regarding several areas of performance, which have been drawn from the ICANN Strategic Plan, are of particular interest: * Is ICANN becoming more transparent, accessible and accountable? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done? * Has ICANN improved its operational performance? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done? * Has ICANN improved its performance in the development of Policy? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done? * Has ICANN increased international participation? What improvements have been observed and what still needs to be done? * Have there been improvements in participation and in efficiency of the ICANN multi-stakeholder model? What more needs to be done? * What plans and actions have been observed that position ICANN for more comprehensive transition of the technical coordination of the Internet's system of unique identifiers. What more needs to be done? * What improvements have been made in dispute resolution and the application of fairness and equity in the management of complaints and other mechanisms of review that are available? These include the work of the reconsideration committee, the Ombudsman and independent review. Comments will be received at http://forum.icann.org/lists/performance-2007/ until June 5, 2007 and should be sent to: performance-2007(a)icann.org. A discussion will also take place on ICANN's Blog <http://blog.icann.org> commencing today. ICANN's public participation site <http://public.icann.org> will also serve as a tool for participation in this dialogue.

6 11

Re: [At-Large] [EURO-ALS] At-Large EURALO 2007 Election Results
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Firstly, happy Birthday Wolfgang :) Secondly: Vittorio's long service has borne great fruit and I hope that a vote of congratulations and thanks will be the first order of business at the ALAC meeting in San Juan, and of the first EURALO board meeting :) Third: While a number of EURALO board members will be in San Juan, others will not - however, we can arrange a meeting and telephonic access to it, so that the first board meeting could be held in San Juan. Needless to say, we staff people will be happy to make all the necessary arragements. On 22/05/07, Vittorio Bertola <vb(a)bertola.eu> wrote: > Kleinwächter ha scritto: > > First of all congratulations to all elected. We went through a > > complicated process but at the end of the day we have been sucessful > > to to build a structure and to elect a leadership for our EURALO and > > to give legitimacy to our two reps in the ALAC. > > > > Looking at the results I am also happy that at the end of the day the > > principle of geographical and cultural diversity is reflected in the > > final outcome. I am also satisfied that we have a good balance of > > different institutions in the EURALO Board. This gives us a great > > opportunity to move now from the discussion of procedural issues to > > issues of substance. I am sure that this discussion will produce much > > more unity than we had in the procedural debate. > > > > I would also invite Patrick, even if he was not elected, to give his > > energy and knowledge to the EURALO process. There is no need to have > > a position to give input to the process. And the at large community > > lives to a high degree from individual contributions. > > > > Next step would be the drafting of a workplan. I would also encourage > > a discussion on a strategy paper with some mid-term goals and > > milestones. As you have seen there are two European ICANN meeting > > scheduled now fro 2008 and 2009. This should be seen as a challenge > > for EURALO not only to show the face but to bring fresh ideas and > > actions to the ICANN process. > > > > Hope we have some time in San Juan to discuss the next concrete > > steps. > > I want to join you in the congratulations, and also thank you and the > other people that, while not being candidates in these votes, put a lot > of effort in the last years to make it happen. > > While thanking everyone for the support in the vote for the EURALO > Board, I'd like to point out that this marks the long awaited end of my > four-and-a-half-year-long term in the ALAC. Nobody expected that it > would take so long, and we had to try, struggle, make mistakes, go > through cycles of enthusiasm and disappointment. In the end, we > succeeded, though I agree with some of the comments about the need to > understand what went wrong in these last steps of the process, and > whether we need more adjustments in the future. (And also, congrats to > Veronica and Sébastien, and I'd be happy to set aside a couple of hours > with you, early in San Juan, to pass on some experience and bring you up > to speed.) > > But I disagree with the comment I've read somewhere, that this process > forces good people to exit: actually, this election brings for the first > time into active positions in the At Large constituency several new > people, both relatively new to ICANN such as Veronica and many others, > involved in the past in other constituencies such as Sébastien and > Desiree, or already very expert in Internet Governance matters such as > Jeanette, Bill and Karen. And we need more voices, not less, even if > this costs some time and "pain" to understand and accept each other. > > I agree with you that we need a timeline for the next months. We have > some "meta" issues still open, such as individual participation; also, I > think that the theme of At Large Board seats and other reforms will > likely be on the table during the ALAC review (at least, we've been > working for it). We have to increase our credibility by making our > processes more reliable and less contrasted, and by getting more and > more organizations, of many different kinds, around this table. It's a > big challenge for the EURALO Board and we have to be prepared. > > To be practical, I don't know how do we want to proceed - do we want > ICANN to set up a EURALO Board mailing list, or do we want to work here, > or set one up on our own? We should start working immediately, and > perhaps arrange a meeting for those of us who will be in San Juan, if > enough will (who is going to attend?). > > In the meantime, and to conclude, I've discovered that today is your > birthday, so - happy birthday, Wolfgang! > > Regards, > -- > vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- > --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [EURO-ALS] At-Large EURALO 2007 Election Results
by Vittorio Bertola May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Kleinwächter ha scritto: > First of all congratulations to all elected. We went through a > complicated process but at the end of the day we have been sucessful > to to build a structure and to elect a leadership for our EURALO and > to give legitimacy to our two reps in the ALAC. > > Looking at the results I am also happy that at the end of the day the > principle of geographical and cultural diversity is reflected in the > final outcome. I am also satisfied that we have a good balance of > different institutions in the EURALO Board. This gives us a great > opportunity to move now from the discussion of procedural issues to > issues of substance. I am sure that this discussion will produce much > more unity than we had in the procedural debate. > > I would also invite Patrick, even if he was not elected, to give his > energy and knowledge to the EURALO process. There is no need to have > a position to give input to the process. And the at large community > lives to a high degree from individual contributions. > > Next step would be the drafting of a workplan. I would also encourage > a discussion on a strategy paper with some mid-term goals and > milestones. As you have seen there are two European ICANN meeting > scheduled now fro 2008 and 2009. This should be seen as a challenge > for EURALO not only to show the face but to bring fresh ideas and > actions to the ICANN process. > > Hope we have some time in San Juan to discuss the next concrete > steps. I want to join you in the congratulations, and also thank you and the other people that, while not being candidates in these votes, put a lot of effort in the last years to make it happen. While thanking everyone for the support in the vote for the EURALO Board, I'd like to point out that this marks the long awaited end of my four-and-a-half-year-long term in the ALAC. Nobody expected that it would take so long, and we had to try, struggle, make mistakes, go through cycles of enthusiasm and disappointment. In the end, we succeeded, though I agree with some of the comments about the need to understand what went wrong in these last steps of the process, and whether we need more adjustments in the future. (And also, congrats to Veronica and Sébastien, and I'd be happy to set aside a couple of hours with you, early in San Juan, to pass on some experience and bring you up to speed.) But I disagree with the comment I've read somewhere, that this process forces good people to exit: actually, this election brings for the first time into active positions in the At Large constituency several new people, both relatively new to ICANN such as Veronica and many others, involved in the past in other constituencies such as Sébastien and Desiree, or already very expert in Internet Governance matters such as Jeanette, Bill and Karen. And we need more voices, not less, even if this costs some time and "pain" to understand and accept each other. I agree with you that we need a timeline for the next months. We have some "meta" issues still open, such as individual participation; also, I think that the theme of At Large Board seats and other reforms will likely be on the table during the ALAC review (at least, we've been working for it). We have to increase our credibility by making our processes more reliable and less contrasted, and by getting more and more organizations, of many different kinds, around this table. It's a big challenge for the EURALO Board and we have to be prepared. To be practical, I don't know how do we want to proceed - do we want ICANN to set up a EURALO Board mailing list, or do we want to work here, or set one up on our own? We should start working immediately, and perhaps arrange a meeting for those of us who will be in San Juan, if enough will (who is going to attend?). In the meantime, and to conclude, I've discovered that today is your birthday, so - happy birthday, Wolfgang! Regards, -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] At-Large EURALO 2007 Election Results
by Roberto Gaetano May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

I would also like to start with the congratulations to the elected. Starting with te ALAC representatives, I particularly welcome Veronica, who is relatively new to the ICANN process. Veronica, I am sure that you will catch up, maybe with the help of your colleagues in the Committee, and prove that my concerns were wrong. Just before the opening of the vote, I claimed I could make a bet on the result. Unfortunately, I did not bet money, because below is my forecast, that I sent to Nick, who can confirm, was correct: ================ My pick on the most likely result: - Veronica - 31 to 33 - 2 years - Sebastien - 32 to 36 - 1 year - Patrick - 35 to 38 - 0 years ================ I don't know how far away I was on the score, but the ranking is indeed the one that came as a result. To the new ALAC members, just one advice, from past experience. We have been caught off base already a couple of times by the Ombudsman, we have again ALS applications that were not voted because of the high number of abstensions and the non-participation to vote. I would consider having a strong set of rules, and compliance to them, a priority. Congratulations also to the Board members. Also in this case, I am sure that my concern in having a too large Board will be answered by strong participation and effectiveness in the management of EURALO. According to the Bylaws, presence of 2/3 of the Board members is necessary to take decisions: with a board of 9, that means at least 6 people on every call. Wolfgang is right in stating that the first priority is to establish a work plan. Besides the two ICANN meetings in Europe in the years to come, there is already an important date to mark on the calendar: the Studienkreis in Warsaw in October. Wolfgang has repeatedly asked for an EURALO meeting in combination with that appointment, receiving no answer so far. Now that we have a management team in place, it will be time to answer positively, and start finalizing the venue. Cheers, Roberto > -----Original Message----- > From: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On > Behalf Of Kleinwächter, Wolfgang > Sent: 22 May 2007 11:35 > To: Nick Ashton-Hart; Europe Discuss; euro-als(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Cc: policy(a)icann.org; At-Large Worldwide; > secretariat(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Subject: Re: [EURO-Discuss] [EURO-ALS] At-Large EURALO 2007 > Election Results > > First of all congratulations to all elected. We went through > a complicated process but at the end of the day we have been > sucessful to to build a structure and to elect a leadership > for our EURALO and to give legitimacy to our two reps in the ALAC. > > Looking at the results I am also happy that at the end of the > day the principle of geographical and cultural diversity is > reflected in the final outcome. I am also satisfied that we > have a good balance of different institutions in the EURALO > Board. This gives us a great opportunity to move now from the > discussion of procedural issues to issues of substance. I am > sure that this discussion will produce much more unity than > we had in the procedural debate. > > I would also invite Patrick, even if he was not elected, to > give his energy and knowledge to the EURALO process. There is > no need to have a position to give input to the process. And > the at large community lives to a high degree from individual > contributions. > > Next step would be the drafting of a workplan. I would also > encourage a discussion on a strategy paper with some mid-term > goals and milestones. As you have seen there are two European > ICANN meeting scheduled now fro 2008 and 2009. This should be > seen as a challenge for EURALO not only to show the face but > to bring fresh ideas and actions to the ICANN process. > > Hope we have some time in San Juan to discuss the next concrete steps. > > Best wishes > > wolfgang > > > > > > ________________________________ > > Von: euro-als-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von > Nick Ashton-Hart > Gesendet: Mo 21.05.2007 16:43 > An: Europe Discuss; euro-als(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Cc: policy(a)icann.org; At-Large Worldwide; > secretariat(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > Betreff: [EURO-ALS] At-Large EURALO 2007 Election Results > > > Dear All: > > I'm pleased to report the results of the 2007 EURALO Elections. > > ALAC COMMITTEE: > > 2-year Term: CRETU, Veronica > 1-year Term: BACHOLLET, Sebastian > > EURALO BOARD > > Number of Seats Chosen: All Candidates (from a selection by > ballot of 5, 7, 9, or all candidates) > > Members Elected (in order of election, taking into account > Bylaw requirement of nationality diversity with respect to > first 5 seats) > > HOFMANN, Jeannette > LUDWIG, Wolf > BERTOLA, Vittorio > DE QUITO, Paco > MILOSHEVIC, Desiree > BRUCH, Christophe > BANKS, Karen > DRAKE, Bill > VANSNICK, Rudi > > Whilst Sebastian Bachollet and Veronica Cretu were also > candidates for board seats, the elections process agreed on > was that those elected to ALAC seats would not also occupy > board seats, though they would be able to attend board meetings. > > For those who wish to review the details of the election, and > to ensure independent verification of the results published, > the voting system provides a URL as follows: > > http://www.bigpulse.com/pollresults?code=YZMs83SWNAgmq75TMXUb > > The procedures related to the election can be found at: > > https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 > > Since one-half of the EURALO board was to be elected every > year, as per the Bylaws for the region adopted in Lisbon, it > was submitted for consideration by the ICANN staff that the > top 1/2 (rounded to the nearest whole number) would serve a > 2-year term, and the bottom 1/2 a 1-year term. Given the > number of members of the board, that procedure would not > resolve whether the top 4, or 5, would be serving 2-years. > Perhaps the region will allow the board, in its first > meeting, to decide this question. > > On behalf of the staff of ICANN may I extend extend our > congratulations to the newly-elected officers and wish them > the best in their new roles. I look forward to working with them all. > > -- > Regards, > > > Nick Ashton-Hart > Director, At-Large > ICANN > PO Box 32160 > London N4 2XY > United Kingdom > Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] > USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 > mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 > email: <mailto:nick.ashton-hart@icann.org> > Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: > nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart > Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a tlarge-lists.icann.org > > Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities Canada'sALS application
by Alan Greenberg May 22, 2007

May 22, 2007

Michael, without commenting on the relevance of ICANN's use of the term "individual user", I fail to see how the access modalities alter the concept of user. Most of my non-ICANN professional attention is on the developing world. The vast majority of people use some form of shared access, often a cyber cafe or a university lab. I don't understand why that disenfranchises them any more than it does a university student in Ohio or my 92 year old aunt if she uses her daughter's connection. The user is someone who uses the network. Now there are plenty of reasons to say that some shared access users, particularly those with low-bandwidth connections are being ignored and perhaps disenfranchised, but in my mind, ICANN's user definition does not seem to be one of them. Alan At 5/22/2007 02:13 AM, Michael Gurstein wrote: >I must say that I really do find this notion of "individual Internet >users" as somehow being the basic level of Internet access/use >granularity really quite culture (geography/ideology) bound... > >As I said in an earlier extended exchange on this, for most of the world >the basic level of Internet access/use is not "the individual" user but >rather some form of hybrid collaborative/collective use/user whether >through family use, telecenter use, even multiple semi-anonymous use in >cybercafes. > >That this notion was written into the ICANN bylaws simply shows how >narrow was the group that was originally involved in the processes >through which those mechanisms were established. I don't have the time >or energy at the moment to launch a personal crusade around this issue >but perhaps we could at least recognize that those notions make only >marginal sense in practice and that even in the case of Canada and the >TC application, the reality of Internet use will need to expand to >include the group and the collective and that as I understand it is all >that TC is saying. > >MG > > >-----Original Message----- >From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >[mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny >Younger >Sent: May 21, 2007 7:02 AM >To: Luc Faubert; Alan Greenberg >Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss >Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities >Canada'sALS application > > >Luc, > >The ICANN bylaws stipulate: > >The criteria and standards for the certification of >At-Large Structures shall be established in such a way >that participation by individual Internet users who >are citizens or residents of countries within the >Geographic Region of the RALO will predominate in the >operation of each At-Large Structure within the RALO > >Telecommunities Canada describes itself as a sort of >"holding company" comprised of multiple organizational >members whose activities predominate in the operation >of TC; individual Internet users (remember them?) are >not the predominant factors in TC's operation (per >their own admission). > >Alan was correct in rejecting their application. The >better question is why did others approve the >application that was deficient on its face? > > >--- Luc Faubert <LFaubert(a)conceptum.ca> wrote: > > > Hi Alan, > > > > May I ask why you voted NO for Telecommunities > > Canada's ALS application? > > > > Telecommunities Canada is one of the (if not the) > > foremost organizations > > doing work related to the Internet in Canada. TC has > > been working > > tirelessly for almost 15 years, advancing the cause > > of Internet use and > > penetration in Canada. > > > > Regards, > > > > > > _________________________________________ > > Luc Faubert > > Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du > > changement / > > IT governance and change management consulting > > +1 514 236 5129 > > www.LucFaubert.com > > www.LucFaubert.com/blog > > www.isoc.qc.ca > > www.ccig.ca > > www.uqbm.qc.ca > > www.maillons.qc.ca > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > NA-Discuss mailing list > > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists >.icann.org > > --- > > Draft MoU with ICANN: > > http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU > > > > Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP > > > > Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct > > > > > > >________________________________________________________________________ >____________Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business >gives you all the tools to get online. >http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting > >_______________________________________________ >NA-Discuss mailing list >NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists >.icann.org >--- >Draft MoU with ICANN: >http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU > >Draft Operating Principles: >http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP > >Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct

1 0

Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities Canada'sALS application
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 21, 2007

May 21, 2007

Somehow this got caught in the spam filter the first time round. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Gurstein <mgurst(a)vcn.bc.ca> Date: 22-May-2007 07:13 Subject: {Spam?} RE: [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities Canada'sALS application To: Danny Younger <dannyyounger(a)yahoo.com>, Luc Faubert <LFaubert(a)conceptum.ca>, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg(a)mcgill.ca> Cc: At-Large Worldwide <alac(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org>, NA Discuss <na-discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org> I must say that I really do find this notion of "individual Internet users" as somehow being the basic level of Internet access/use granularity really quite culture (geography/ideology) bound... As I said in an earlier extended exchange on this, for most of the world the basic level of Internet access/use is not "the individual" user but rather some form of hybrid collaborative/collective use/user whether through family use, telecenter use, even multiple semi-anonymous use in cybercafes. That this notion was written into the ICANN bylaws simply shows how narrow was the group that was originally involved in the processes through which those mechanisms were established. I don't have the time or energy at the moment to launch a personal crusade around this issue but perhaps we could at least recognize that those notions make only marginal sense in practice and that even in the case of Canada and the TC application, the reality of Internet use will need to expand to include the group and the collective and that as I understand it is all that TC is saying. MG -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny Younger Sent: May 21, 2007 7:02 AM To: Luc Faubert; Alan Greenberg Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for Telecommunities Canada'sALS application Luc, The ICANN bylaws stipulate: The criteria and standards for the certification of At-Large Structures shall be established in such a way that participation by individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the Geographic Region of the RALO will predominate in the operation of each At-Large Structure within the RALO Telecommunities Canada describes itself as a sort of "holding company" comprised of multiple organizational members whose activities predominate in the operation of TC; individual Internet users (remember them?) are not the predominant factors in TC's operation (per their own admission). Alan was correct in rejecting their application. The better question is why did others approve the application that was deficient on its face? --- Luc Faubert <LFaubert(a)conceptum.ca> wrote: > Hi Alan, > > May I ask why you voted NO for Telecommunities > Canada's ALS application? > > Telecommunities Canada is one of the (if not the) > foremost organizations > doing work related to the Internet in Canada. TC has > been working > tirelessly for almost 15 years, advancing the cause > of Internet use and > penetration in Canada. > > Regards, > > > _________________________________________ > Luc Faubert > Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du > changement / > IT governance and change management consulting > +1 514 236 5129 > www.LucFaubert.com > www.LucFaubert.com/blog > www.isoc.qc.ca > www.ccig.ca > www.uqbm.qc.ca > www.maillons.qc.ca > > > _______________________________________________ > NA-Discuss mailing list > NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists .icann.org > --- > Draft MoU with ICANN: > http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU > > Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP > > Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct > ________________________________________________________________________ ____________Building a website is a piece of cake. Yahoo! Small Business gives you all the tools to get online. http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/webhosting _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists .icann.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Fwd: [icann-staff] Tralliance - .TRAVEL Registry Sponsor
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 21, 2007

May 21, 2007

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Craig.Schwartz <Craig.Schwartz(a)icann.org> Date: 21-May-2007 17:32 Subject: [icann-staff] Tralliance - .TRAVEL Registry Sponsor To: icann-staff(a)icann.org All: There have been a number of postings recently to the ALAC mailing list, as well as published news articles, about the alleged imminent failure of the .TRAVEL registry. I am in contact with the sponsor about their plan and intention to continue operations, and would appreciate it if you directed inquiries about this to me. I will of course be connecting with Paul Levins and John Jeffrey about the approach to handling communications on this matter. Thanks, Craig ___________________ Craig Schwartz Chief gTLD Registry Liaison ICANN 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Direct +1 310 301 5832 Mobile +1 310 447 4913 www.icann.org -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0