Every decision-making organ in the history of the world has relied on the use of representatives to put forward the views of a large number of people. That larger group of people then seek to persuade the representatives of their point and ask them to enter it into discussions.
In the most effective form of accountability and representativeness so far
Further to my last message Kieren ... our Working groups use the Wiki's to aggregate list outcomes and where you find these details... Also each WG has a lead and or Chair and they can provide regular updates to you if that would help... and of course in reports from out Monthly ALAC Meetings and the various RALO ones as well... The beta web site we saw in New Delhi will make the navigation to such issue interest much easier and we look forward to that transition... List overload and the cacophony of topics on single list format, is why we have adopted this new method and indeed our new work flow paradigm that (since our Delhi meeting) will come into action and integrate Regional and ALS input more effectively... CLO -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Kieren McCarthy Sent: Monday, 18 February 2008 9:20 PM To: 'At-Large Worldwide' Subject: Re: [At-Large] Give it a break Hi Vittorio, all My main point is this: how can I see the lines of discussion within ALAC? How do I see policy forming, and how can I have input into that? My job is to get people involved in ICANN. In many cases that is someone with an interest in what we do but who needs to be helped and pulled into the process - of whom I met many during this recent meeting. I can't point them to an internal mailing list. And, as it is at the moment, I wouldn't want to subject people to the At Large public mailing list. I know there are lots of people working very hard in ALAC and in the RALOs to make this kind of review and interaction happen, and I have seen the many wiki pages and mailing lists that work to make this information readily available (I think the IDN page is possibly the best: https://st.icann.org/idn-policy/index.cgi?at_large_idn_policy), but at the moment it stills feels too spread apart and too insular. This is not a criticism of the hard work people are doing, it is simply an outside observation. At the moment, because I simply do not have time to sign up to and review all the different mailing lists, I use the At Large mailing list to keep track of what is going on. What you find on that list however - in a similar way to the GA list - is a very aggressive and negative forum dominated by a small number of people who are likely to scare off genuine participants that wish to know more. In essence, the public mailing list is ALAC's public face, and it is not a very pleasant one to look at. There is also the issue that the adversarial approach on the list is the antithesis of what ICANN purports to be - a consensus-building body. It creates exactly the wrong sort of atmosphere and, I believe, damages the careful co-operative links built up between people. In tolerating instinctive knee-jerk criticism, people who work hard are put on the defensive and in so doing are demoralized from providing their time and energies in the future. Consensus building should be the equivalent of intelligent, if occasionally passionate, discussion held round a group of chairs in a café. At the moment - on the public mailing list at least - it is more of a yelled argument over loud music in a bar. I'm not trying to tell ALAC what to do, and I realise that saying all this comes across as yet more criticism piled on top of a constant stream of criticism, but it does concern me and so I feel obliged to raise it. Kieren ---------------------- Kieren McCarthy ---------------------- General manager of public participation, ICANN http://www.icann.org -----Original Message----- From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb@bertola.eu] Sent: Monday, February 18, 2008 2:40 PM To: Kieren McCarthy Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide' Subject: Re: [At-Large] Give it a break Kieren McCarthy ha scritto: -
democracy - those representatives are voted in, and can be voted out in periodic elections. This is the model that ALAC follows - or should be following - if it is to provide useful policy input.
I tend to disagree on this, for at least two reasons. One is specific - the ALAC also has an internal mailing list, which committee members heavily use; in fact, most of the discussions inside the group tend to happen on the internal list rather than on this one. So I don't see how any level of noise on this list can hamper the ALAC's ability to work - in fact, in the model you expose, ALAC members could just ignore this list altogether. The other one is philosophical - even if I was one of the people who designed this model, and even if one of the reasons for it was also to provide an intermediate, representative point where votes could be taken, you can't just conclude that the ALAC has a blank mandate to do and say whatever they like without consulting on each issue and only being accountable when needing reelection. This traditional, 19th century model is in deep crisis almost everywhere in the world. Increasingly, people are unwilling to delegate to intermediate bureaucracy layers. The Internet is the place where this happens more than everywhere else, as things tend to happen by consensus and in several cases there is no real authority unless it is continuously recognized by the bottom. If your problem is that you want messages by Mr. Williams to be filtered out, let the ALAC adopt netiquette rules under which his messages, as well as those by anyone else, can be judged. But this does not imply shutting down lines of dialogue between the ALAC and its constituents. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <-------- _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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