quick comment responding to Afnic
All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com
Sounds good, Andrew, and fits with the discussion on our last BC member call. From: Andrew Mack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 at 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach <bc-outreach@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach@icann.org>> Cc: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org<mailto:sdelbianco@netchoice.org>> Subject: quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
+1 --------- Original Message --------- Subject: Re: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic From: "Steve DelBianco" <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Date: 1/23/17 5:43 pm To: "amack" <amack@amglobal.com>, "BC Outreach" <bc-outreach@icann.org> Sounds good, Andrew, and fits with the discussion on our last BC member call. From: Andrew Mack <amack@amglobal.com> Date: Monday, January 23, 2017 at 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach <bc-outreach@icann.org> Cc: Steve DelBianco <sdelbianco@netchoice.org> Subject: quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC's excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson's draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com | amack@amglobal.com _______________________________________________ Bc-outreach mailing list Bc-outreach@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bc-outreach
Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [😊] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From: bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com
Very well researched Marylin, thanks for the efforts. whilst i am in support of your edits, a valid point Andrew made on the last BC call about leadership in the BC being a voluntary service where members who have the bandwidth to do the job have to put their legs in the pool may need to be couched in stronger terms to enhance what you have in the last paragraph. Cheers, LoR. On Mon, January 23, 2017 11:21 am, Marilyn Cade wrote:
Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support.
I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that.
I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies.
Here are the facts - taken from our website.
-39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least.
-The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either
a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies]
b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA
Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count.
19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus.
But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website.
this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members.
Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity.
I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [😊] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built.
So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment.
Marilyn Cade
________________________________ From: bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic
All,
As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN).
For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you.
For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations:
The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions.
Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se.
Cheers, A ___________________
Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack
[cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB]
AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc.
| amack@amglobal.com
_______________________________________________ Bc-outreach mailing list Bc-outreach@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bc-outreach
Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From: bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic. Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC. So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office. ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness. Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US? The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide. Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business. Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal. He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received. IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities. Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload. Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN. Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China. I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented? ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From: bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
All, Thanks for your comments. Our agreed goal was to send out a simple response to this specific comment and our esteemed Policy Chair has reminded me that we need to get him something by COB. Appreciate the background on Afnic and I think we’re all agreed — we should reject the idea that there should be any language requirement in our response. Taking Marilyn’s comments into consideration, let me update my original suggestion as follows: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world, including outreach to SMEs and businesses from regions historically under-represented in ICANN. We have made much progress, and we embrace outreach as an ongoing priority of our constituency. Within the BC many regions and languages represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent international businesses large and small, and reflect the depth and regional diversity of the global business community. The BC actively welcomes Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Hope this works for all. Again, the goal was not to talk in detail about our progress — since Jimson’s post does that well. It is specifically to address this one issue without conceding that there is or should be a language test or quota (but staying short of saying that). Especially those that haven’t weighed in, please do send your thoughts, but let’s put this small one to bed. Need to send it by COB. Thanks, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:54FE9EC6-09A4-4728-A77E-D8F98F71CBC8] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com On 1/26/17, 6:48 PM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic. Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC. So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office. ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness. Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US? The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide. Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business. Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal. He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received. IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities. Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload. Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN. Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China. I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented? ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com> On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
small changes suggested: The BC prides itself on its continued commitment to increase diversity, especially geographic diversity. Within the BC's membership, many regions and languages are represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent [ international - propose to cut this word as it implies that only global businesses are welcomed/which is not the case] businesses large and small, ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:12 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic All, Thanks for your comments. Our agreed goal was to send out a simple response to this specific comment and our esteemed Policy Chair has reminded me that we need to get him something by COB. Appreciate the background on Afnic and I think we’re all agreed — we should reject the idea that there should be any language requirement in our response. Taking Marilyn’s comments into consideration, let me update my original suggestion as follows: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world, including outreach to SMEs and businesses from regions historically under-represented in ICANN. We have made much progress, and we embrace outreach as an ongoing priority of our constituency. Within the BC many regions and languages represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent international businesses large and small, and reflect the depth and regional diversity of the global business community. The BC actively welcomes Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Hope this works for all. Again, the goal was not to talk in detail about our progress — since Jimson’s post does that well. It is specifically to address this one issue without conceding that there is or should be a language test or quota (but staying short of saying that). Especially those that haven’t weighed in, please do send your thoughts, but let’s put this small one to bed. Need to send it by COB. Thanks, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:54FE9EC6-09A4-4728-A77E-D8F98F71CBC8] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com On 1/26/17, 6:48 PM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic. Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC. So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office. ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness. Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US? The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide. Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business. Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal. He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received. IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities. Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload. Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN. Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China. I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented? ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com> On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
We are in your hands. If you can accept my suggestions, I appreciate it. If not, then as the chair, and if the other members of the Outreach Committee are fine, please do go ahead. M ________________________________ From: Marilyn Cade <marilynscade@hotmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:29 AM To: amack; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic small changes suggested: The BC prides itself on its continued commitment to increase diversity, especially geographic diversity. Within the BC's membership, many regions and languages are represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent [ international - propose to cut this word as it implies that only global businesses are welcomed/which is not the case] businesses large and small, ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com> Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:12 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic All, Thanks for your comments. Our agreed goal was to send out a simple response to this specific comment and our esteemed Policy Chair has reminded me that we need to get him something by COB. Appreciate the background on Afnic and I think we’re all agreed — we should reject the idea that there should be any language requirement in our response. Taking Marilyn’s comments into consideration, let me update my original suggestion as follows: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world, including outreach to SMEs and businesses from regions historically under-represented in ICANN. We have made much progress, and we embrace outreach as an ongoing priority of our constituency. Within the BC many regions and languages represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent international businesses large and small, and reflect the depth and regional diversity of the global business community. The BC actively welcomes Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Hope this works for all. Again, the goal was not to talk in detail about our progress — since Jimson’s post does that well. It is specifically to address this one issue without conceding that there is or should be a language test or quota (but staying short of saying that). Especially those that haven’t weighed in, please do send your thoughts, but let’s put this small one to bed. Need to send it by COB. Thanks, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:54FE9EC6-09A4-4728-A77E-D8F98F71CBC8] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com On 1/26/17, 6:48 PM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic. Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC. So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office. ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness. Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US? The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide. Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business. Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal. He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received. IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities. Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload. Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN. Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China. I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented? ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com> On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
All proposed changes are fine by me. Anyone else? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:D0A0845E-61CE-4C25-8A0C-B05A534C168B] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com On 2/1/17, 10:29 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: small changes suggested: The BC prides itself on its continued commitment to increase diversity, especially geographic diversity. Within the BC's membership, many regions and languages are represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent [ international - propose to cut this word as it implies that only global businesses are welcomed/which is not the case] businesses large and small, ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:12 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic All, Thanks for your comments. Our agreed goal was to send out a simple response to this specific comment and our esteemed Policy Chair has reminded me that we need to get him something by COB. Appreciate the background on Afnic and I think we’re all agreed — we should reject the idea that there should be any language requirement in our response. Taking Marilyn’s comments into consideration, let me update my original suggestion as follows: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world, including outreach to SMEs and businesses from regions historically under-represented in ICANN. We have made much progress, and we embrace outreach as an ongoing priority of our constituency. Within the BC many regions and languages represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships. Our goal is to represent international businesses large and small, and reflect the depth and regional diversity of the global business community. The BC actively welcomes Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Hope this works for all. Again, the goal was not to talk in detail about our progress — since Jimson’s post does that well. It is specifically to address this one issue without conceding that there is or should be a language test or quota (but staying short of saying that). Especially those that haven’t weighed in, please do send your thoughts, but let’s put this small one to bed. Need to send it by COB. Thanks, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:54FE9EC6-09A4-4728-A77E-D8F98F71CBC8] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com> On 1/26/17, 6:48 PM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic. Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC. So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office. ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness. Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US? The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide. Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business. Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal. He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received. IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities. Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload. Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN. Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China. I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented? ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue). Other thoughts? ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com> On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote: Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support. I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that. I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies. Here are the facts - taken from our website. -39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least. -The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies] b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count. 19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus. But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website. this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members. Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity. I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built. So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment. Marilyn Cade ________________________________ From:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic All, As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN). For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you. For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations: The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions. Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se. Cheers, A ___________________ Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack [cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB] AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc. | amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
I have read through and it does capture my line of thinking so it has my total support. LOR. On Wed, February 1, 2017 10:43 am, amack wrote:
All proposed changes are fine by me. Anyone else? ___________________
Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack
[cid:D0A0845E-61CE-4C25-8A0C-B05A534C168B]
AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> | amack@amglobal.com
On 2/1/17, 10:29 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
small changes suggested:
The BC prides itself on its continued commitment to increase diversity, especially geographic diversity.
Within the BC's membership, many regions and languages are represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships.
Our goal is to represent [ international - propose to cut this word as it implies that only global businesses are welcomed/which is not the case] businesses large and small, ________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Wednesday, February 1, 2017 10:12 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic
All,
Thanks for your comments. Our agreed goal was to send out a simple response to this specific comment and our esteemed Policy Chair has reminded me that we need to get him something by COB.
Appreciate the background on Afnic and I think we’re all agreed — we should reject the idea that there should be any language requirement in our response. Taking Marilyn’s comments into consideration, let me update my original suggestion as follows:
The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world, including outreach to SMEs and businesses from regions historically under-represented in ICANN. We have made much progress, and we embrace outreach as an ongoing priority of our constituency.
Within the BC many regions and languages represented, and many BC businesses work around the world in multiple geographies and languages. The BC counts among its members many representatives from many language groups, including French and French-speaking businesses as well as associations with geographically and linguistically diverse memberships.
Our goal is to represent international businesses large and small, and reflect the depth and regional diversity of the global business community. The BC actively welcomes Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions.
Hope this works for all. Again, the goal was not to talk in detail about our progress — since Jimson’s post does that well. It is specifically to address this one issue without conceding that there is or should be a language test or quota (but staying short of saying that).
Especially those that haven’t weighed in, please do send your thoughts, but let’s put this small one to bed. Need to send it by COB.
Thanks, A ___________________
Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack
[cid:54FE9EC6-09A4-4728-A77E-D8F98F71CBC8]
AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc.
| amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
On 1/26/17, 6:48 PM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
I hope that all of you also looked, as I did, at who is involved in Afnic.
Sebastien Bachollet is a member of the AFNIC Board. I know that some of you do not know him as well as I do, so I will share, but please, treat this as a confidential comment. Also, Matthew is of course, affiliated with AFNIC.
So, I have a question about whether it is possible that this is something different and perhaps an overreaction that does not include facts about who we are makes it look like we would agree to require language diversity in candidates for office.
ICANN working language is English. Now, of course, we want to encourage various categories of diversity, but if we start making speaking other languages a requirement to stand for election and accept the vast amount of work that is required of the officers, we will start looking like the ISPCP in terms of numbers, or like the NPOC in terms of effectiveness.
Sebastien worked for an association in Paris, when I helped to found the BC. After a year of not having any dues, the decision was taken to establish dues. ICC volunteered [NOT any staff you know] to provide some of the payment processing and they did a very very and very bad job on that,as they were not set up to deal with such small amounts of money. And they especially did not effectively collect the dues from their members, as things got confusing and companies started saying: wait, I pay ICC membership dues of $XXXXXX, and so why did you send me an invoice for $1,000 US?
The agreement of the then officers [I WAS NOT ONE] was to recruit Sebastien, who was then a member, and agreed to resign, and to do certain administrative work for the new constituency. They agreed to pay the association that Sebastien worked for for a part time management of the administrative functions. In the end, the three Councilors who were also the officers -- we had a very slim jim organization back then -- did not pay what they [we] clearly owed to the association he worked for because the uncollected dues amounted to almost $80,000. ICC walked away from the support that they had volunteered to provide.
Some of us then had to become involved and get the BC on solvent ground. It took a few years and was very challenging. Sebastien left the association he worked for and wanted to join as a small business entrapreneur. Again, I had nothing to do with this decision, but he was rejected, as he had a business idea but not a business.
Things became very challenging for him for some years within ICANN and he finally developed and marketed the idea of .paris, in a much earlier introduction of new gTLDs. He developed a very strong proposal
and had a good strategy. After making the proposal public, another company swooped in and started lobbying ICANN, with a good deal of $ backing, and dissing his proposal.
He eventually won election to the ICANN board via the ALAC, and that is probably when most of you really became aware of him. I am not sure how much standing that this suggestion will have, as when staff do the analysis, they will say: posted, only three comments were received.
IF we submit a fact based submission, I am okay, but I do not agree with part of what you proposed, and I think that we have to be careful not to damage the situation that we enjoy with the ICANN staff of needing support for our outreach activities.
Now, again, why are we hinting that if you speak French, you are qualified to be elected as an officer? I thought that we want our officers to be able to do real work, and carry a huge workload.
Now, that might include being able to chat in the UN languages, but it is not a requirement of ICANN. English is the working language at ICANN.
Should we do more to have documents translated? We do when we go to a particular country when we know that it is worthwhile -- e.g. spanish when we are in LATAM; French when in Switzerland, or France; Chinese when in China.
I think that we need to be careful not to overreact and read too much into a single comment that essentially is not particularly well documented?
________________________________ From: amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 10:51 AM To: Marilyn Cade; BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: Re: quick comment responding to Afnic
Thanks Marilyn. My goal was to make this as short as possible but also to respond directly to Afnic before ICANN asks us to respond. Happy to add more detail if you’d like to propose, but I think our call consensus was that short is good (and that we’d do one larger comment talking about our broad outreach in all areas, which would include other important issues, such as the SME issue).
Other thoughts? ___________________
Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack
[cid:73A7D001-CD5C-4FC5-B475-20E9EF4455BC]
AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc.
| amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
On 1/23/17, 11:21 AM, "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@hotmail.com<mailto:marilynscade@hotmail.com>> wrote:
Thanks, Andrew, but I am not supportive of making a statement that our own website does not support.
I have a suggestion for a statement that takes Andrew's comments but makes it more factual. After all, our justification for the funding that we get to do outreach is because we are not diverse enough -- and we keep acknowledging that.
I think we are taking too much focus on a single comment from AFNIC, which is after all, limited to French companies.
Here are the facts - taken from our website.
-39 of the companies list United States of America, although as they select category 1 to pay dues, they have self declared as global in their reach, so we probably are actually going to have to update our categories, so that there is a clear note that a global company is able to declare the regions it does business in. For instance, we could add a foot note that says: Country of incorporation is shown/Regions covered for category 1 are: [is it all five?]category 2: at least two regions, category three: this is weird, as I do no work in the US, but am an SME, so it looks like my category is only US. Also, Andrew also falls into that category -- and I know your work is both in Latin America and Africa, at least.
-The associations that are members - and we have lost a few really important ones as members, like WITSA -- list their country of incorporation, although they are either
a) global like ICC or TAGI or regional like ETNO and AIM [ETNO and AIM both have a number of french speaking member companies]
b) or regional -- like ASOCIO or AfiCTA
Of the total number of BC members, 21 are from outside of the US. That includes our Canadian member in that count.
19 are in the SME category. 8 are in category 2, meaning regional in coverage/focus.
But I think that the message is a little different and has to recognize that we have to be sensitive that the facts are really out there on our website.
this has happened before when some challenged the BC about its breadth.... and at that time, Philip and I undertook an analysis of the associations membership, so that we could showcase the breadth of the engagement of companies represented by the association members.
Also, I don't think that we can claim victory on the diversification that we have as the Outreach Committee, responsibility for... we are still asking for funding from ICANN budget to build geo diversity.
I was a little disappointed that you did not include SME diversity Andrew, as that seems to me to also be a key goal that we have, unless I have forgotten all the past discussions. [?] and the understanding about how national presence of business is built.
So, I offer an edit to your proposed language: see attachment.
Marilyn Cade
________________________________ From:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org> <bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org<mailto:bc-outreach-bounces@icann.org>> on behalf of amack <amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2017 10:35 AM To: BC Outreach Cc: Steve DelBianco Subject: [Bc-outreach] quick comment responding to Afnic
All,
As we discussed on the call last week, I think it makes most sense to have a two-pronged approach: one that has a broader comment outlining the BC’s excellent work on building an outreach strategy generally and then shorter, succinct comments directly addressing any issues that are mentioned (in part so we have responses in early, rather than responding ex post to ICANN).
For the broader piece, my sense is that this comment is pretty well formed already based on Jimson’s draft and additions from Marilyn, Lawrence and others. Thank you.
For the individual pieces, let me take a quick stab at responding to Afnic based on our conversations:
The BC prides itself on its diversity, especially geographic diversity. Among our general membership and within the BC leadership we have made significant efforts to expand representation from regions around the world. As part of this effort many regions and languages represented, and the BC counts among its members representatives from French and French-speaking businesses. We welcome Business representatives from all regions, and will continue to encourage BC members from diverse regions and backgrounds to run for leadership positions.
Is this close to what the group wants? I was trying hard here to both capture that we do have French speaking people w/o suggesting any language target per se.
Cheers, A ___________________
Andrew Mack Principal C: +1 (202) 256-1077 O: +1 (202) 642-6429 Skype: Andrew.Mack
[cid:81F35676-849D-4C6A-B2BF-5DB7F28EFEDB]
AMGlobal Consulting 2001 Massachusetts Avenue, NW First Floor Washington, DC 20036 USA www.amglobal.com<http://www.amglobal.com/> AMGlobal Consulting I Emerging Markets, CSR consulting, etc<http://www.amglobal.com/> www.amglobal.com AMG helps clients do more and better business in emerging markets. New Market Entry, Social Engagement, CSR consulting, etc.
| amack@amglobal.com<mailto:amack@amglobal.com>
_______________________________________________ Bc-outreach mailing list Bc-outreach@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/bc-outreach
participants (5)
-
amack -
Jimson Olufuye -
Lawrence OlaWale-Roberts -
Marilyn Cade -
Steve DelBianco