Dear Bastiaan, Section 6 of the current EURALO Rules of Procedure also specifies the rights & duties of members, which are also minimal. https://community.icann.org/x/mzd-Ag Yet, compliance with 6.1, 6.4 and 6.6 has been challenging and time consuming for the EURALO Chair to keep track of ALS representatives. :-( Kindest regards, Olivier On 04/08/2016 14:06, Bastiaan Goslings wrote:
Thanks, Yrjö!
Excellent, very helpful, I’m learning all the time - although the requirements, with regard to active participation, are not as specific as I’d hoped for ;-)
cheers, Bastiaan
On 04 Aug 2016, at 12:57, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bastiaan,
The minimum requirements are in the Adjuct document #4 of the ALAC Rules of Procedure, https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/Rules+of+Procedure?preview=/2262...
Best,
Yrjö
From: Bastiaan Goslings <bastiaan.goslings@ams-ix.net> Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2016 1:46 PM To: Yrjö Länsipuro Cc: Bastiaan Goslings; Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond; EURALO Task Force on ALS Engagement Subject: Re: [euralo-tf-als-engagement] Improving participation on EURALO monthly calls
Hi Olivier,
Thanks. I agree this is something that the TF could pick up i.e. ‘collect’. So let’s do it. If we put together the ‘feedback from our ALSes’ we can try to come up with recommendations to improve the (results of) monthly calls.
Btw to confirm: with ‘feedback’ you mean responses from ALSes to the message below you sent to the EURALO-list, right?
Something else: on the TF-call yesterday you referred a couple of times to actual formal ‘minimal participation requirements for ALSes’. That is at least what’s in my notes. I tried to find these requirements, it would help me to frame/scope what we as a TF want to achieve, but no success. I even went through the ICANN bylaws - for the 1st time which in itself was a good and interesting exercise. Can you share where these minimum requirements are listed?
Thanks again, regards Bastiaan
On 03 Aug 2016, at 21:23, Yrjö Länsipuro <yrjo_lansipuro@hotmail.com> wrote:
Dear Oliver,
I think this is very much part of our job.
Best,
Yrjö
From: euralo-tf-als-engagement-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org <euralo-tf-als-engagement-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org> on behalf of Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2016 9:54 PM To: 'EURALO Task Force on ALS Engagement' Subject: [euralo-tf-als-engagement] Fwd: Improving participation on EURALO monthly calls
Dear EURALO Taskforce on ALS engagement,
please be so kind to find the email I mentioned during today's conference call. I proposed that this Task Force collects the feedback from our ALSes in order to make improvements to the monthly EURALO calls.
Is this something which the task force would like to take up?
Kindest regards,
Olivier
-------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Improving participation on EURALO monthly calls Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 20:47:34 +0200 From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> To: euro-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
Hello everyone,
the Doodle for the next EURALO call showed that having a call on the 4th Tuesday in August was more popular than having it at our regular 3rd Tuesday.
Now that we have decided on the date of our next call, we also have to follow-up on improving the participation of At-Large Structure representatives and members in a call.
This has several facets:
A. Best time for a conference call.
At present the monthly call takes place on the 3rd Tuesday of the month, at 18:00 UTC. Is the day suitable? Is the time suitable? Should we rotate the time? Gisella will send a number of Doodles for this.
B. Agenda of a call.
At present, the standing items are: 1. Roll Call -- this is needed for all of our calls and doesn't take time.
2. Review of Action Items -- this is needed to track the action items of our last call/meeting
3. Review of current Public Consultations -- the ALAC has a mandate to engage in ICANN policy and respond to Public Consultations. I realise that some say that the 20 minutes that we usually spend on this, is too long. But this is the only opportunity to explain the complex policy matters at ICANN and hopefully generate a debate in the RALO led by ALS representatives who have an interest in the topic. At present this is really lacking! How do we resolve this problem?
4. Updates on Task Forces -- at present we have two task forces, one on the Bylaws Review and one on At-Large Structure Engagement. Should we restrict our Task Forces to two Task Forces at a time, or should we have more?
5. ...and onwards, ad-hoc agenda items -- at present we spend some time in a mix of policy and organisational matters.
General Questions: - What should we do to improve the call? - Should we make the monthly call 90 minutes instead of 60 minutes? - Should we provide 10-15 minutes for an At-Large Structure to present its own work and how it relates to At-Large? - Should we use 20-30 minutes of the call to invite an expert to speak about a specific topic and how it affects end users? - Do you have any other suggestion to make the call more interesting?
Let's please get the ball rolling now and start the discussion.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
_______________________________________________ euralo-tf-als-engagement mailing list euralo-tf-als-engagement@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euralo-tf-als-engagement euralo-tf-als-engagement Info Page - ICANN mm.icann.org To see the collection of prior postings to the list, visit the euralo-tf-als-engagement Archives. Using euralo-tf-als-engagement
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html