Hi Evan To correct misinformation - ALL RALO formation groups were encouraged to include individuals. However, the ALSes were ultimately responsible for their regional organization, and ALAC did make a conscious decision to be hands off in the regional formation with regard to their operating principles etc (within the limits of the bylaws). So, if you think individuals should be allowed to participate in other regions RALOs, then you are free to contact the members of those RALOs and lobby them to change their minds. With regard to your other comments - as I have said previously, the nomCom review is underway, and they are asking for input, so maybe your comments should be directed there, where they can inform the review of the NomCom. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Evan Leibovitch [mailto:evan@telly.org] Sent: Friday, October 12, 2007 12:30 To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC Positions open for nominations 2007-2008 Siavash Shahshahani wrote:
Here's a problem for those who think non-comm appointees are unnecessary: There are more than a few countries where NGOs are looked upon with suspicion by the local govt and potential ALSs are simply afraid to apply to ICANN for accreditation. Should we disenfranchise citizens of those countries? Note that the same risk may not necessarily apply to an 'individual' selected by non-comm as long as the individual is well-known and trusted in the country and is not in the business of organizing a group which the govt deems potentially subversive. I agree that this is a problem, but its solution is beyond the scope of the NomComm, for a number of reasons:
1) It involves a deeper involvement in politics than may be desirable. 2) There is a finite limit to the number of NomComm ALAC reps; in a region where multiple instances of these obstacles occur, who is to judge which countries have voice and which do not? 3) The NomComm appears to have a built-in bias against the inexperienced, although I would add that this is reasonable given the actual mandate that the NomComm has regarding its choices for ALAC. 4) ALSs participate at the RALO level, and each region gets two selections to ALAC. It is unfair to the other ALSs if people get to immediately participate at a higher level (ALAC instead of RALO) only because they come from a country which impedes NGO development. I suggest that the answer is to achieve this empowerment through the RALOs rather than through the NomComm, where the issue has already been addressed in at least one region. NARALO explicitly developed its internal structure to allow and encourage participation by individuals who are not part of ALSs. Why did ALAC not provide guidance to all RALOs to address this issue? Doing so would encourage individual participation at the RALO level (in unlimited numbers) from every country with the problems described by Siavash. Please consider the process with the greater level of transparency, accountability, public participation and regional awareness. - Evan _______________________________________________ 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 No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1064 - Release Date: 10/11/2007 15:09 No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.488 / Virus Database: 269.14.8/1064 - Release Date: 10/11/2007 15:09