That is, so far nearly nothing. Right? Dominik -----Original Message----- From: izumiaizu@gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi AIZU Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 12:48 PM To: Dominik Filipp Cc: Evan Leibovitch; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC and AtLarge and france at large a) and b) happned before the ALAC was established, so we could do much at all. to counter c) ALS/RALO was proposed to put some mechanism between the public and ALAC members, however ALAC memebers do not have voting rights at the Board, that is different from the a) to c) situation. izumi 2008/6/9 Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@dsoft.sk>:
... 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
What have you done as an ALAC member within the ICANN structure to change or avoid this undesired situation?
Dominik
-----Original Message----- From: izumiaizu@gmail.com [mailto:izumiaizu@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Izumi AIZU Sent: Monday, June 09, 2008 4:34 AM To: Dominik Filipp Cc: Evan Leibovitch; At-Large Worldwide 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@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@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@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.ic a nn.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
--
Izumi Aizu <<
Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita Kumon Center, Tama University, Tokyo Japan * * * * * << Writing the Future of the History >> www.anr.org