Good evening: Having consulted our executive committee on the final text, I am glad to confirm that ALS ISOC Wallonia endorses the EURALO response to the ITEMS Review. Best regards Christopher On 24 Mar 2017, at 09:20, CW Mail <mail@christopherwilkinson.eu> wrote:
Dear Olivier:
Thankyou. I expect that our ALS will turn this around quickly.
However, I am aware of a more general issue. At Large is saying (if I get it right) that the ALS are a viable channel for bottom up individual users' interests. I agree. I suggest that this is a case where ALAC could make that point.
Best regards
Christopher
On 24 Mar 2017, at 01:26, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
Dear Christopher,
thank you for your kind email. I do not know if an extension would be possible. With Alan Greenberg and Staff CC'ed to this email, I gather someone could find out using the usual channels.
I did mention that we could submit the Statement by the deadline of March 24th @23:59 UTC and give the ratification another 7 days, which means your ALS members would have more time to read the Statement. But that doesn't answer the possibility of an amendment to the Statement.
Kindest regards,
Olivier
On 23/03/2017 23:59, CW Mail wrote:
Dear Olivier:
Thankyou. However, I would hereby request a formal extension of the deadline of 24 March to permit information and consultation of our ALS. This, in the interests of bottom up process and accountability.
I am very well aware of the scope and complexity of the issues that have had to be addressed in this context, and consequently express no surprise as to the time it has taken to reach these conclusions.
With many thanks and regards
Christopher Wilkinson
On 23 Mar 2017, at 19:12, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:
Dear EURALO members,
after a long process which asked you to comment on the At-Large Review, including contributions from at least 30 people across all RALOs to the Google Doc, both on the Google Doc itself, but also by sending RALO Chairs comments by email, in English, Spanish and French, it appears that we have a pretty complete RALO response to the At-Large Review. The Google DOC is now turned to '"view only". Please email me if there is anything that stands out as being out of line. Altogether, it's a pretty impressive document considering we received input from dozens of people --- and not just the usual suspects.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1DZLG-xM-WbyhI9LqAkS3pGZwvDjBI10h0xxYp5Ch...
In my opinion, the process by which the input was received and the spontaneous response from ALSes is such that it is a testimony that the mixed RALO/ALS and RALO/individual user model is possible and actually works. A significant response is possible when a topic is close to the heart of our members.
I have seen support for the ITEMS report elsewhere in ICANN. What has struck me as well is the outright emotional hostility shown by some of the commentators that have submitted comments to the public forum. What I have found sad is that the criticism that was wielded at At-Large was not constructive at all. Quite the contrary, it followed in the same hostile language and manner of the Review that I have neither found constructive nor helpful at all.
I hope you'll recognise that the RALO response tries to be constructive. It is not as polished as the forthcoming ALAC response as by design, we kept verbatim extracts of the input received - so contributors can recognise their imprint on the document.
The deadline for the comment to be submitted is tomorrow, 24 April 2017 at 23:59 UTC. I cannot urge you enough to submit your own comments directly with the commenting process. Full details are on: https://www.icann.org/public-comments/atlarge-review-draft-report-2017-02-01...
RALO Chairs plan to get staff to submit the response (or to submit the response themselves) by the deadline tomorrow, with a note that the document is undergoing RALO ratification.
In EURALO, I'd like to hear the choice how YOU want this document ratified by EURALO?
1. a consensus call? So anyone objecting to any of the responses can make themselves known, including the response they object to? 2. An anonymous vote on each of the responses - so any ALS can vote in support or against each of the responses 3. An anonymous vote on the Statement itself - so any ALS can vote in support or against the whole Statement without detailing the responses 4. Any other suggestion?
Please respond as soon as possible, as if we are to conduct a vote, I'd like to keep the vote open for at least 5 working days.
Kindest regards,
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond EURALO Chair <20170323 At-Large Review Issues RALOs and At-Large Structures FINAL DRAFT.docx><20170323 At-Large Review Issues RALOs and At-Large Structures FINAL DRAFT.pdf>_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss
Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
-- Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD http://www.gih.com/ocl.html