ALAC / ALS - users and policy
thinking about the At-Large Summit proposal, some recent discussion about rules and procedures, role of the NomCom, etc. (NomCom in many ways replaced the original concept of an At Large directly representing users in ICANN.) It's not clear to me what the ALS do. As an essential building block of the ALAC I think it's time the ALS and ALAC started supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN. There seem to be about 100 ALS, how many have a webpage devoted to informing users of ALAC activities and contributions to ICANN? How many even have a mailing list used to pass on information about ALAC and ICANN activities? (not many.) Example. About new gTLD policy Vittorio recently wrote: At 4:35 PM +0200 10/12/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Hi, I don't want to sound rude, but I do have to post a call to order - if the members of the ALAC are so busy that they cannot devote any time to the single most important policy issue of the next few months, what do we have an ALAC for?
Perhaps it's just a matter of getting priorities right.
This "single most important policy issue of the next few months". Within the next couple of days how many ALS webpages or mailing lists will make information about this new working group available? I just took a look at a few ALS websites (quite a few don't seem to be functioning), hardly any make substantive mention of ICANN and ALAC let alone any policy information or discussion. A suggestion. Before the first ICANN meeting of 2008. (1.) Whenever ALAC is to provide input on an ICANN policy activity, ALAC delegates will ensure that a summary describing the policy activity, ALAC's intended input to it, and any questions ALAC would like users to address, is provided to ALS so they can make such information available to their members and ALAC community at large. (2.) All ALS will "Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere) publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals, structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership [including how to join the group], working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s)." (3.) All ALS will "Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN by distributing to individual constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions." To this end all ALS will provide: A section on their website dedicated to information about the ALS (2 above) and ALAC and provide information about ALAC policy discussions and how users can contribute. The website must include a mechanism for receiving public comment on issues being discussed. ALS officers will ensure that public comment is summarized and provided to the ALAC. If the ALS is unable to create and operate a website then pages will be made available on the ALAC website or ALAC wiki. A mailing list where policy discussions can take place. The list will be open to any interested individual from their country/region. ALS officers will ensure that list discussion is summarized and provided to the ALAC. (4.) ALAC delegates will be responsible for ensuring comments from ALS are considered in the ALAC's response to any policy activity. A record of ALS contributions should be maintained on the ALAC website. (5.) ALS officers (including ALS officers who may also be ALAC delegates) will only eligible for financial support to attend ICANN meetings or regional RALO meetings, if their ALS meets the criteria provided in 1,2,3 above. I think it should be obvious why this is important. Reaction from the board and senior staff to the successful creation of the RALOs has been very positive. The ICANN Sao Paulo meeting was the first time I heard Vint Cerf talk about how he saw a possibility of the ALAC community, though the RALO structures, being able to provide direct representation to the Board. As someone who tried to maintain the At Large elections I thought this pretty significant. During a workshop in Lisbon NomCom <http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm> this time quoting... VINT CERF: It occurs to me -- I can't predict this, of course, but it occurs to me that if we are successful with the rapidly forming RALO structure that some day we might imagine that board members might be appointed by those RALOs. We're not there yet. But is it possible that we can now go to the formed RALOs and say, in emulation of what might ultimately occur, can you supply recommendations for people to serve on the ALAC. (end Vint quote). At a meeting of the ALAC and board and Paul Twomey in San Juan, Vint again said the same thing again: ALAC via the RALO structures might select Directors. Paul agreed. Roberto (as Vice Chair) answered a question about how the board could see ALAC achieving direct such representation said it would have to see real bottom up policy development, users being consulted in policy and there being clear processes for that happening (I'm sure Roberto will correct me if I am misremembering/misinterpreting his comments.) It's frustrating that the ALAC/ALS seem to have done nothing to make this direct representation possible. I think we should start. Thanks, Adam
Hi Adam Well, the information goes out. Unfortunately it doesn't go out in multiple languages in a timely fashion. However, some ALSes are doing exactly what you suggest (for example the one to which I belong, the TTCS, has a mailing list for ICANN activity, from which summaries are posted to the main list, as well as an ICANN issues page on their Wiki) - alfaredi also does similar activities, and I'm sure that others do. But you are correct - there are many that don't. The calls for participation that have been sent out are many, but the responses are few. The ALAC is looking at its subcommittees - we are looking at an ALS-support/outreach subcommittee to assist there, and the Secretariats are meeting in LA, so we can look at solutions to the lack of participation there. I do recall the comments, and they acted as a real spur to the finalization of the RALOs, and hence informed user participation in ICANN, but it is frustrating that it isn't happening. The ALS attraction rate is down, the list activity is often focused on regions getting their piece of the pie, whether in names on a committee or budget allocation to go to a meeting, and not on policy. ALAC members are not the At Large any more, we shouldn't singlehandedly write positions and send them in on behalf of the At Large (and we aren't - which leads to NOTHING submitted from At Large - see the GTLD issue), but the ALSes aren't stepping up enough to have proper user feedback on the policy issues. Maybe ALAC members could work to coax feedback on issues, drafting a first-steps paper or a questionnaire, I don't know if that would work either. Maybe we can have a brainstorming session with the Secretariats in LA to get some concrete proposals to increase participation in policy. This has to happen, otherwise the whole thing will be a failure. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 08:00 To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] ALAC / ALS - users and policy thinking about the At-Large Summit proposal, some recent discussion about rules and procedures, role of the NomCom, etc. (NomCom in many ways replaced the original concept of an At Large directly representing users in ICANN.) It's not clear to me what the ALS do. As an essential building block of the ALAC I think it's time the ALS and ALAC started supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN. There seem to be about 100 ALS, how many have a webpage devoted to informing users of ALAC activities and contributions to ICANN? How many even have a mailing list used to pass on information about ALAC and ICANN activities? (not many.) Example. About new gTLD policy Vittorio recently wrote: At 4:35 PM +0200 10/12/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Hi, I don't want to sound rude, but I do have to post a call to order - if the members of the ALAC are so busy that they cannot devote any time to the single most important policy issue of the next few months, what do we have an ALAC for?
Perhaps it's just a matter of getting priorities right.
This "single most important policy issue of the next few months". Within the next couple of days how many ALS webpages or mailing lists will make information about this new working group available? I just took a look at a few ALS websites (quite a few don't seem to be functioning), hardly any make substantive mention of ICANN and ALAC let alone any policy information or discussion. A suggestion. Before the first ICANN meeting of 2008. (1.) Whenever ALAC is to provide input on an ICANN policy activity, ALAC delegates will ensure that a summary describing the policy activity, ALAC's intended input to it, and any questions ALAC would like users to address, is provided to ALS so they can make such information available to their members and ALAC community at large. (2.) All ALS will "Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere) publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals, structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership [including how to join the group], working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s)." (3.) All ALS will "Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN by distributing to individual constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions." To this end all ALS will provide: A section on their website dedicated to information about the ALS (2 above) and ALAC and provide information about ALAC policy discussions and how users can contribute. The website must include a mechanism for receiving public comment on issues being discussed. ALS officers will ensure that public comment is summarized and provided to the ALAC. If the ALS is unable to create and operate a website then pages will be made available on the ALAC website or ALAC wiki. A mailing list where policy discussions can take place. The list will be open to any interested individual from their country/region. ALS officers will ensure that list discussion is summarized and provided to the ALAC. (4.) ALAC delegates will be responsible for ensuring comments from ALS are considered in the ALAC's response to any policy activity. A record of ALS contributions should be maintained on the ALAC website. (5.) ALS officers (including ALS officers who may also be ALAC delegates) will only eligible for financial support to attend ICANN meetings or regional RALO meetings, if their ALS meets the criteria provided in 1,2,3 above. I think it should be obvious why this is important. Reaction from the board and senior staff to the successful creation of the RALOs has been very positive. The ICANN Sao Paulo meeting was the first time I heard Vint Cerf talk about how he saw a possibility of the ALAC community, though the RALO structures, being able to provide direct representation to the Board. As someone who tried to maintain the At Large elections I thought this pretty significant. During a workshop in Lisbon NomCom <http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm> this time quoting... VINT CERF: It occurs to me -- I can't predict this, of course, but it occurs to me that if we are successful with the rapidly forming RALO structure that some day we might imagine that board members might be appointed by those RALOs. We're not there yet. But is it possible that we can now go to the formed RALOs and say, in emulation of what might ultimately occur, can you supply recommendations for people to serve on the ALAC. (end Vint quote). At a meeting of the ALAC and board and Paul Twomey in San Juan, Vint again said the same thing again: ALAC via the RALO structures might select Directors. Paul agreed. Roberto (as Vice Chair) answered a question about how the board could see ALAC achieving direct such representation said it would have to see real bottom up policy development, users being consulted in policy and there being clear processes for that happening (I'm sure Roberto will correct me if I am misremembering/misinterpreting his comments.) It's frustrating that the ALAC/ALS seem to have done nothing to make this direct representation possible. I think we should start. Thanks, Adam _______________________________________________ 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
At 3:48 PM -0400 10/13/07, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
Hi Adam Well, the information goes out. Unfortunately it doesn't go out in multiple languages in a timely fashion. However, some ALSes are doing exactly what you suggest (for example the one to which I belong, the TTCS, has a mailing list for ICANN activity, from which summaries are posted to the main list, as well as an ICANN issues page on their Wiki) - alfaredi also does similar activities, and I'm sure that others do. But you are correct - there are many that don't.
I am sure there are ALS that do provide information. But as it's a requirement of being an accredited ALS we should be much more concerned about those that do not. Yes, translation will be a challenge. But don't let it become a reason for not acting. (That should not be taken as in any way dismissing the importance of making communicating in multiple languages). How about writing to all ALS now. Remind them of their commitment to ALAC <http://alac.icann.org/correspondence/structures-app.htm>. Tell them they must meet the requirements of the minimum criteria. And audit the lists and websites of all ALS in the last week or so of December. What are the minimum requirements every ALS should have on its ALAC page?
The calls for participation that have been sent out are many, but the responses are few. The ALAC is looking at its subcommittees - we are looking at an ALS-support/outreach subcommittee to assist there, and the Secretariats are meeting in LA, so we can look at solutions to the lack of participation there.
Responses are generally low across ICANN, whether policy development or other processes (in my experience, anyway.) But as we do believe in open, bottom up processes we have to work with this problem. The minimum we can do is try to inform people. There's plenty of information being produced that can be pushed to the ALS. I think the more information pushed the more likely something will spark interest.
I do recall the comments, and they acted as a real spur to the finalization of the RALOs, and hence informed user participation in ICANN, but it is frustrating that it isn't happening. The ALS attraction rate is down, the list activity is often focused on regions getting their piece of the pie, whether in names on a committee or budget allocation to go to a meeting, and not on policy.
ALAC members are not the At Large any more, we shouldn't singlehandedly write positions and send them in on behalf of the At Large (and we aren't - which leads to NOTHING submitted from At Large - see the GTLD issue), but the ALSes aren't stepping up enough to have proper user feedback on the policy issues. Maybe ALAC members could work to coax feedback on issues, drafting a first-steps paper or a questionnaire, I don't know if that would work either.
ALAC delegates are the leadership -- just as other councils and constituencies have leadership. About gTLDs, see Danny's comment. The NCUC (and most GNSO constituencies) are led by 3 to 5 active people (by active I mean people who will get involved at some stage in contributing to a policy process, most documents will be written by 1 or 2 then sent for comment.) There are 15 ALAC members. You have to cover more ground, but there are more of you to do it. What I'm suggesting is you start sending information out to the ALS. I am not suggesting you write 25 page expert opinions; 1 or 2 pages describing an issue and asking for comment would be fine (can always ask ICANN staff --Kieren McCarthy?-- for advice/support on issues your not sure about). The note you sent about the gTLD working group is a good example of the type of thing that could go to all ALS. I know some work hard and I do not mean to denigrate the work you do.
Maybe we can have a brainstorming session with the Secretariats in LA to get some concrete proposals to increase participation in policy. This has to happen, otherwise the whole thing will be a failure.
I'm sorry, I think you're missing the point. What I've been suggesting is based on requirements of becoming an accredited ALS. Doesn't need more discussion, it needs to be implemented. Best, Adam
Jacqueline
-----Original Message----- From: Adam Peake [mailto:ajp@glocom.ac.jp] Sent: Saturday, October 13, 2007 08:00 To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] ALAC / ALS - users and policy
thinking about the At-Large Summit proposal, some recent discussion about rules and procedures, role of the NomCom, etc. (NomCom in many ways replaced the original concept of an At Large directly representing users in ICANN.)
It's not clear to me what the ALS do. As an essential building block of the ALAC I think it's time the ALS and ALAC started supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN.
There seem to be about 100 ALS, how many have a webpage devoted to informing users of ALAC activities and contributions to ICANN? How many even have a mailing list used to pass on information about ALAC and ICANN activities? (not many.)
Example. About new gTLD policy Vittorio recently wrote:
At 4:35 PM +0200 10/12/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Hi, I don't want to sound rude, but I do have to post a call to order - if the members of the ALAC are so busy that they cannot devote any time to the single most important policy issue of the next few months, what do we have an ALAC for?
Perhaps it's just a matter of getting priorities right.
This "single most important policy issue of the next few months". Within the next couple of days how many ALS webpages or mailing lists will make information about this new working group available?
I just took a look at a few ALS websites (quite a few don't seem to be functioning), hardly any make substantive mention of ICANN and ALAC let alone any policy information or discussion.
A suggestion. Before the first ICANN meeting of 2008.
(1.) Whenever ALAC is to provide input on an ICANN policy activity, ALAC delegates will ensure that a summary describing the policy activity, ALAC's intended input to it, and any questions ALAC would like users to address, is provided to ALS so they can make such information available to their members and ALAC community at large.
(2.) All ALS will "Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere) publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals, structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership [including how to join the group], working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s)."
(3.) All ALS will "Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN by distributing to individual constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions." To this end all ALS will provide:
A section on their website dedicated to information about the ALS (2 above) and ALAC and provide information about ALAC policy discussions and how users can contribute. The website must include a mechanism for receiving public comment on issues being discussed. ALS officers will ensure that public comment is summarized and provided to the ALAC. If the ALS is unable to create and operate a website then pages will be made available on the ALAC website or ALAC wiki.
A mailing list where policy discussions can take place. The list will be open to any interested individual from their country/region. ALS officers will ensure that list discussion is summarized and provided to the ALAC.
(4.) ALAC delegates will be responsible for ensuring comments from ALS are considered in the ALAC's response to any policy activity. A record of ALS contributions should be maintained on the ALAC website.
(5.) ALS officers (including ALS officers who may also be ALAC delegates) will only eligible for financial support to attend ICANN meetings or regional RALO meetings, if their ALS meets the criteria provided in 1,2,3 above.
I think it should be obvious why this is important.
Reaction from the board and senior staff to the successful creation of the RALOs has been very positive. The ICANN Sao Paulo meeting was the first time I heard Vint Cerf talk about how he saw a possibility of the ALAC community, though the RALO structures, being able to provide direct representation to the Board. As someone who tried to maintain the At Large elections I thought this pretty significant.
During a workshop in Lisbon NomCom <http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm> this time quoting... VINT CERF: It occurs to me -- I can't predict this, of course, but it occurs to me that if we are successful with the rapidly forming RALO structure that some day we might imagine that board members might be appointed by those RALOs. We're not there yet. But is it possible that we can now go to the formed RALOs and say, in emulation of what might ultimately occur, can you supply recommendations for people to serve on the ALAC. (end Vint quote).
At a meeting of the ALAC and board and Paul Twomey in San Juan, Vint again said the same thing again: ALAC via the RALO structures might select Directors. Paul agreed. Roberto (as Vice Chair) answered a question about how the board could see ALAC achieving direct such representation said it would have to see real bottom up policy development, users being consulted in policy and there being clear processes for that happening (I'm sure Roberto will correct me if I am misremembering/misinterpreting his comments.)
It's frustrating that the ALAC/ALS seem to have done nothing to make this direct representation possible. I think we should start.
Thanks,
Adam
_______________________________________________ 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
Adam Peake wrote:
How about writing to all ALS now. Remind them of their commitment to ALAC <http://alac.icann.org/correspondence/structures-app.htm>. Tell them they must meet the requirements of the minimum criteria. And audit the lists and websites of all ALS in the last week or so of December.
Perhaps ALAC should first be reminded of its commitment to ALSs -- give them the information they need to make informed reports to their memberships and engage in useful policy analysis. If ICANN and ALAC want participation from the public -- that is, the public that is not knee-deep in ICANN issues and eager to insert its agenda -- then it needs to _suitably_ invest in that effort before it may expect a payback. I guess a periodic audit is reasonable if ALAC members suddenly find themselves with too much time on their hands. Given that ICANN needs _more_ public involvement and not less, frequent audit/purge cycles are a sub-optimal use of ALAC's limited human resources. In any case, non-participation by an ALS should be addressed by finding out its needs and obstacles, rather than looking for reasons to disenfranchise. Please keep in mind that these bodies, unlike those in NCUC, were sought out and courted by ICANN. Their very act of responding by applying for entry indicates an interest in participation. If they don't participate further, that's as much ALAC's fault as the ALSs'.
The minimum we can do is try to inform people. There's plenty of information being produced that can be pushed to the ALS. As has been mentioned, there is a language issue. Most of the information produced is not even in a form of English most lay people (who are not ICANN insiders) would easily comprehend. I can only shudder at the challenges faced by ALSs whose primary language is not English.
Remember, At-Large and the ALS/RALO structure is an effort to work with the public, not career policy junkies. Information intended to be 'pushed' through this infrastructure must consider its audience and recognize the distinction from other ICANN constituencies. Simply raising the volume of information that can't be understood will not fix the lack of participation. - Evan
I completely agree wit Evan. Communication should be bidirectional. Up to now we have concentrated the efforts in outreach and RALO formation, now we need to make a reasonable plan for action, and to do this we need to assess what resources are needed. And I do not mean only financial support to various F2F meeting (which is probably the most popular request), but support for understanding the issues and support for further outreach. In plain understandable local languages. I believe that something has been done already, I have seen leaflets that are quite explanatory, but maybe we should make the point on what we have and what is further needed. The audit that Adam is proposing is something that should eventually be done, but my personal opinion is that the december deadline is too short. After all, a specific date can be set as part of the plan that will be developed, I assume, in LA. Cheers, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: 15 October 2007 04:14 To: Adam Peake; At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] ALAC / ALS - users and policy
Adam Peake wrote:
How about writing to all ALS now. Remind them of their commitment to ALAC <http://alac.icann.org/correspondence/structures-app.htm>. Tell them they must meet the requirements of the minimum criteria. And audit the lists and websites of all ALS in the last week or so of December.
Perhaps ALAC should first be reminded of its commitment to ALSs -- give them the information they need to make informed reports to their memberships and engage in useful policy analysis.
If ICANN and ALAC want participation from the public -- that is, the public that is not knee-deep in ICANN issues and eager to insert its agenda -- then it needs to _suitably_ invest in that effort before it may expect a payback.
I guess a periodic audit is reasonable if ALAC members suddenly find themselves with too much time on their hands. Given that ICANN needs _more_ public involvement and not less, frequent audit/purge cycles are a sub-optimal use of ALAC's limited human resources.
In any case, non-participation by an ALS should be addressed by finding out its needs and obstacles, rather than looking for reasons to disenfranchise. Please keep in mind that these bodies, unlike those in NCUC, were sought out and courted by ICANN. Their very act of responding by applying for entry indicates an interest in participation. If they don't participate further, that's as much ALAC's fault as the ALSs'.
The minimum we can do is try to inform people. There's plenty of information being produced that can be pushed to the ALS. As has been mentioned, there is a language issue. Most of the information produced is not even in a form of English most lay people (who are not ICANN insiders) would easily comprehend. I can only shudder at the challenges faced by ALSs whose primary language is not English.
Remember, At-Large and the ALS/RALO structure is an effort to work with the public, not career policy junkies. Information intended to be 'pushed' through this infrastructure must consider its audience and recognize the distinction from other ICANN constituencies.
Simply raising the volume of information that can't be understood will not fix the lack of participation.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@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
Hi Adam, Whoof - I have multiple things to say on the below and on your last posting about the summit. Sorry if I get a bit long winded! One of the biggest reasons why ALAC/ICANN is not getting decidedly better input from the ALSs is lack of education. Most of us don't want to dive into a big policy debate if we don't understand it. That is why the NARALO wanted to do education/outreach in LA and why we were planning a Summit for all ALSs - again education but then also as a means of sharing ideas between the regions in order to encourage participation. Without an informed ALS community, the RALOs will never be able to participate properly. Now, about having a page on my web site for ICANN things... Again, if I understood the issues better I would know what to put there. I don't, yet. So, other than having a few links over to the ICANN space that's the most I could do. (Which I haven't yet. Damn - no excuse for that and will get on it!) Your suggestion #1 - YES!!!! That would be SO useful! We have been promised since February that ICANN would be doing this but, due to staffing issues, have not been able. I know that ALAC is busy but, personally, I would rather they put their time into stuff like this as this is what we are supposed to be doing. That is supposed to be the reason for the existance of ALAC, right? To facilitate policy discussion/input to ICANN. So, I'm going to stop now but I agree that we need to start on this ASAP. D ________________________________ From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Adam Peake Sent: Sat 10/13/2007 7:59 AM To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] ALAC / ALS - users and policy thinking about the At-Large Summit proposal, some recent discussion about rules and procedures, role of the NomCom, etc. (NomCom in many ways replaced the original concept of an At Large directly representing users in ICANN.) It's not clear to me what the ALS do. As an essential building block of the ALAC I think it's time the ALS and ALAC started supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN. There seem to be about 100 ALS, how many have a webpage devoted to informing users of ALAC activities and contributions to ICANN? How many even have a mailing list used to pass on information about ALAC and ICANN activities? (not many.) Example. About new gTLD policy Vittorio recently wrote: At 4:35 PM +0200 10/12/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Hi, I don't want to sound rude, but I do have to post a call to order - if the members of the ALAC are so busy that they cannot devote any time to the single most important policy issue of the next few months, what do we have an ALAC for?
Perhaps it's just a matter of getting priorities right.
This "single most important policy issue of the next few months". Within the next couple of days how many ALS webpages or mailing lists will make information about this new working group available? I just took a look at a few ALS websites (quite a few don't seem to be functioning), hardly any make substantive mention of ICANN and ALAC let alone any policy information or discussion. A suggestion. Before the first ICANN meeting of 2008. (1.) Whenever ALAC is to provide input on an ICANN policy activity, ALAC delegates will ensure that a summary describing the policy activity, ALAC's intended input to it, and any questions ALAC would like users to address, is provided to ALS so they can make such information available to their members and ALAC community at large. (2.) All ALS will "Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere) publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals, structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership [including how to join the group], working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s)." (3.) All ALS will "Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN by distributing to individual constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions." To this end all ALS will provide: A section on their website dedicated to information about the ALS (2 above) and ALAC and provide information about ALAC policy discussions and how users can contribute. The website must include a mechanism for receiving public comment on issues being discussed. ALS officers will ensure that public comment is summarized and provided to the ALAC. If the ALS is unable to create and operate a website then pages will be made available on the ALAC website or ALAC wiki. A mailing list where policy discussions can take place. The list will be open to any interested individual from their country/region. ALS officers will ensure that list discussion is summarized and provided to the ALAC. (4.) ALAC delegates will be responsible for ensuring comments from ALS are considered in the ALAC's response to any policy activity. A record of ALS contributions should be maintained on the ALAC website. (5.) ALS officers (including ALS officers who may also be ALAC delegates) will only eligible for financial support to attend ICANN meetings or regional RALO meetings, if their ALS meets the criteria provided in 1,2,3 above. I think it should be obvious why this is important. Reaction from the board and senior staff to the successful creation of the RALOs has been very positive. The ICANN Sao Paulo meeting was the first time I heard Vint Cerf talk about how he saw a possibility of the ALAC community, though the RALO structures, being able to provide direct representation to the Board. As someone who tried to maintain the At Large elections I thought this pretty significant. During a workshop in Lisbon NomCom <http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm> this time quoting... VINT CERF: It occurs to me -- I can't predict this, of course, but it occurs to me that if we are successful with the rapidly forming RALO structure that some day we might imagine that board members might be appointed by those RALOs. We're not there yet. But is it possible that we can now go to the formed RALOs and say, in emulation of what might ultimately occur, can you supply recommendations for people to serve on the ALAC. (end Vint quote). At a meeting of the ALAC and board and Paul Twomey in San Juan, Vint again said the same thing again: ALAC via the RALO structures might select Directors. Paul agreed. Roberto (as Vice Chair) answered a question about how the board could see ALAC achieving direct such representation said it would have to see real bottom up policy development, users being consulted in policy and there being clear processes for that happening (I'm sure Roberto will correct me if I am misremembering/misinterpreting his comments.) It's frustrating that the ALAC/ALS seem to have done nothing to make this direct representation possible. I think we should start. Thanks, Adam _______________________________________________ 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 <http://www.alac.icann.org/> ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org <http://www.icannalac.org/>
Darlene, hello.
Hi Adam,
Whoof - I have multiple things to say on the below and on your last posting about the summit. Sorry if I get a bit long winded!
One of the biggest reasons why ALAC/ICANN is not getting decidedly better input from the ALSs is lack of education. Most of us don't want to dive into a big policy debate if we don't understand it. That is why the NARALO wanted to do education/outreach in LA and why we were planning a Summit for all ALSs - again education but then also as a means of sharing ideas between the regions in order to encourage participation. Without an informed ALS community, the RALOs will never be able to participate properly.
I can understand that. But if the ALS don't receive information about what's going on, basic summaries and links to find out more if someone's interest is tweaked, then how is this ever going to change?
Now, about having a page on my web site for ICANN things... Again, if I understood the issues better I would know what to put there. I don't, yet. So, other than having a few links over to the ICANN space that's the most I could do. (Which I haven't yet. Damn - no excuse for that and will get on it!)
Stick a button (ICANN logo, ALAC logo... if there is such a thing, or whatever) on your home page staying "participate in ICANN" and link to a page that for a start explains your organization is an ALS, what that means and anyone interested can join (join by whatever means they join by.) I'm not suggesting you become an expert on every issue (and I know a lot of ICANN stuff is pretty arcane, and to many also pretty dull). Just making sure people see --for example-- the note Jacqueline sent out on "New gTLDs Working Group Formation", links to the text of the reports from liaisons (keeping that text on your site rather then sending people away to wikis etc might be nice), any calls for policy input, etc.
Your suggestion #1 - YES!!!! That would be SO useful! We have been promised since February that ICANN would be doing this but, due to staffing issues, have not been able. I know that ALAC is busy but, personally, I would rather they put their time into stuff like this as this is what we are supposed to be doing. That is supposed to be the reason for the existance of ALAC, right? To facilitate policy discussion/input to ICANN.
That's what I understand. Paragraph at the bottom of this page <http://alac.icann.org/> seems to describe it.
So, I'm going to stop now but I agree that we need to start on this ASAP.
Brilliant! Thanks, Adam
D
From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Adam Peake Sent: Sat 10/13/2007 7:59 AM To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: [At-Large] ALAC / ALS - users and policy
thinking about the At-Large Summit proposal, some recent discussion about rules and procedures, role of the NomCom, etc. (NomCom in many ways replaced the original concept of an At Large directly representing users in ICANN.)
It's not clear to me what the ALS do. As an essential building block of the ALAC I think it's time the ALS and ALAC started supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN.
There seem to be about 100 ALS, how many have a webpage devoted to informing users of ALAC activities and contributions to ICANN? How many even have a mailing list used to pass on information about ALAC and ICANN activities? (not many.)
Example. About new gTLD policy Vittorio recently wrote:
At 4:35 PM +0200 10/12/07, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
Hi, I don't want to sound rude, but I do have to post a call to order - if the members of the ALAC are so busy that they cannot devote any time to the single most important policy issue of the next few months, what do we have an ALAC for?
Perhaps it's just a matter of getting priorities right.
This "single most important policy issue of the next few months". Within the next couple of days how many ALS webpages or mailing lists will make information about this new working group available?
I just took a look at a few ALS websites (quite a few don't seem to be functioning), hardly any make substantive mention of ICANN and ALAC let alone any policy information or discussion.
A suggestion. Before the first ICANN meeting of 2008.
(1.) Whenever ALAC is to provide input on an ICANN policy activity, ALAC delegates will ensure that a summary describing the policy activity, ALAC's intended input to it, and any questions ALAC would like users to address, is provided to ALS so they can make such information available to their members and ALAC community at large.
(2.) All ALS will "Post on the Internet (on the ALAC's website or elsewhere) publicly-accessible, current information about the ALS's goals, structure, description of constituent group(s)/membership [including how to join the group], working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s)."
(3.) All ALS will "Commit to supporting individual Internet users' informed participation in ICANN by distributing to individual constituents/members information on relevant ICANN activities and issues, offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members, and involving individual constituents/members in relevant ICANN policy development, discussions and decisions." To this end all ALS will provide:
A section on their website dedicated to information about the ALS (2 above) and ALAC and provide information about ALAC policy discussions and how users can contribute. The website must include a mechanism for receiving public comment on issues being discussed. ALS officers will ensure that public comment is summarized and provided to the ALAC. If the ALS is unable to create and operate a website then pages will be made available on the ALAC website or ALAC wiki.
A mailing list where policy discussions can take place. The list will be open to any interested individual from their country/region. ALS officers will ensure that list discussion is summarized and provided to the ALAC.
(4.) ALAC delegates will be responsible for ensuring comments from ALS are considered in the ALAC's response to any policy activity. A record of ALS contributions should be maintained on the ALAC website.
(5.) ALS officers (including ALS officers who may also be ALAC delegates) will only eligible for financial support to attend ICANN meetings or regional RALO meetings, if their ALS meets the criteria provided in 1,2,3 above.
I think it should be obvious why this is important.
Reaction from the board and senior staff to the successful creation of the RALOs has been very positive. The ICANN Sao Paulo meeting was the first time I heard Vint Cerf talk about how he saw a possibility of the ALAC community, though the RALO structures, being able to provide direct representation to the Board. As someone who tried to maintain the At Large elections I thought this pretty significant.
During a workshop in Lisbon NomCom <<http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm>http://www.icann.org/meetings/lisbon/transcript-nomcom-28mar07.htm> this time quoting... VINT CERF: It occurs to me -- I can't predict this, of course, but it occurs to me that if we are successful with the rapidly forming RALO structure that some day we might imagine that board members might be appointed by those RALOs. We're not there yet. But is it possible that we can now go to the formed RALOs and say, in emulation of what might ultimately occur, can you supply recommendations for people to serve on the ALAC. (end Vint quote).
At a meeting of the ALAC and board and Paul Twomey in San Juan, Vint again said the same thing again: ALAC via the RALO structures might select Directors. Paul agreed. Roberto (as Vice Chair) answered a question about how the board could see ALAC achieving direct such representation said it would have to see real bottom up policy development, users being consulted in policy and there being clear processes for that happening (I'm sure Roberto will correct me if I am misremembering/misinterpreting his comments.)
It's frustrating that the ALAC/ALS seem to have done nothing to make this direct representation possible. I think we should start.
Thanks,
Adam
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/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/>http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: <http://www.icannalac.org/>http://www.icannalac.org
participants (5)
-
Adam Peake -
Evan Leibovitch -
Jacqueline A. Morris -
Roberto Gaetano -
Thompson, Darlene