Inputs and proposals for the Lisbon GA agenda
Dear all, as discussed and agreed tonight at our monthly call (under agenda point 7), we need to draft the **content part** of our Lisbon GA agenda until our April call (in about four weeks). And as said before, we would like to have broad community inputs and proposals for this agenda drafting. There is some agreement already that our Lisbon discussion should focus on "How to improve member participation at EURALO and its regular activities?" and "How to better represent the voice and interests of European users in At-Large and ICANN?" Some suggestions were already made by some members -- a compilation of these proposals and comments you will find below. Please have a look on it. More inputs, comments and the like are welcome to organize a vivid debate in Lisbon reflecting the questions and concerns of the whole EURALO community! Thanks for your support and kind regards, Wolf _____ Compilation of inputs and suggestions for the Lisbon agenda (received so far): Yrjö wrote 19 March: Sandra's list of questions is a good basis for discussing how to improve the participation of European ALS's in dealing with substantive, sometimes even operational issues like .health. There may be more of that kind when the new gTLD process goes on. Such a discussion is urgently needed. As it was suggested tonight on the EURALO call, we have to concentrate on issues that are of real importance to end users. We don't need to spend precious time of our calls on issues that are far removed from that context, very few of us even understand and nobody wants to comment on. I hope we could devote a part of each call to a substantive discussion on whatever issue is deemed to be important from an end user point of view. As far as communication tools are concerned, the simpler the better. Plain old e-mail is OK, if the topic is interesting enough. As ALS's, we have to try to find out what internet end users in our country/area really think about issues at stake. We are not opinion research institutions and can't afford to commission such studies. But we have our contacts, our networks, our ability to raise an issue and stir a debate. My 2 (€)cents, Bill wrote 19 March: Sandra's proposal makes a lot of sense to me. Oksana wrote 19 March: I would like to support all Sandra's proposition and to add some more aspects. Situation with .health was really very illustrative. ICANN was extremely interested to know what we all (including Ukrainian ALSes) think on this objection process. I do not know anybody in Ukraine, who cares about this .health (except Alexander Kondaurov, who, as a member of WG, spent a lot of his time and efforts to analyze this issue). At the same time, nobody in ICANN is interested to know, what we, Ukrainian ALSes, think about the delegation of Ukrainian IDN .ykp. http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28feb13-en.htm#2.... Despite we shared with a lot of ICANN/ALAC/At-Large representatives all our concerns regarding this delegation. Of course we have our own responsibility for missing the agenda of this Board meeting. But even now, what transparency and accountability we are talking about? How did Sebastien vote in this case? How did Bertrand vote? What documents were submitted to the board by Ukrainian applicant? Now both EMP and InAU are members of the Advisory Committee on top level domains at National Regulator. And we really would like to help to bridge different national stakeholders between themselves and with ICANN. In more general case, it is the question how national ALSes can help in communication between ICANN and end users regarding national issues. Do ALSes have any additional rights, responsibilities, tools of communication or even dispute resolutions? Once again - I do not propose just now to discuss any specific issues. Just the role of any ALS regarding both ICANN and local Internet community. Sandra wrote 14 March: I propose we discuss how the participation process within EURALO can be improved or revitalised. The .health objection process was a good example that there is no working mechanism to gather feedback form At-Large or have a discussion on an issue where the ALAC is supposed to vote on in the interest of the end user? Questions to be considered (but not limited to): - Are ALSes aware of the issues currently under discussion at ALAC / ICANN? If not, why? - How can EURALO fulfil it's mandate to represent the end user voice? - How can we better link the levels of At-Large and ALAC? - Is email the right communication tool, if not what are the alternatives? Are there any? - How can ALS activities be linked to ICANN discussions and the other way round? Dick Kalkmann wrote 10 March: On point I like to mention. I support democratization, transparency and improved participation initiatives within ICANN. At this moment I'm also looking at the possibilities to improve the participation of the Dutch internet community within ICANN. I'm very interested to discuss all those issues in Lisbon. Christoph Bruch wrote 7 February: Obviously some EURALO member organizations engage very little and of course one could imagine to attract more member organizations in order strengthen EURALO's voice. I therefore welcome the initiative on inreach, which - I believe – will encompass aspects also relevant for outreach. My message is simple: EURALO will be primarily attractive to organizations/individuals who can afford to spend a lot of time for this engagement if it continues to operate in the way it has been done in the past years. This is meant as observation not as criticism! This translates to: Increasing the involvement of the silent members will be dependent on being able to offer meaningful modes of participation which consume little time. Talking about options for "limited" participation is my suggestion for the agenda in Lisbon. EuroDIG Secretariat http://www.eurodig.org/ mobile +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig
On Mar 20, 2013, at 1:05 AM, Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig@comunica-ch.net> wrote:
as discussed and agreed tonight at our monthly call (under agenda point 7), we need to draft the **content part** of our Lisbon GA agenda until our April call (in about four weeks). And as said before, we would like to have broad community inputs and proposals for this agenda drafting.
It's good we have time to let ideas percolate up that can eventually be folded into the agenda as merited. Over morning coffee, a couple come to mind: 1. To amplify on Sandra's question,
How can we better link the levels of At-Large and ALAC?
We've understandably tended to focus inward a bit in the initial years of assembling Euralo. But after five years, it might be helpful in stimulating engagement if we were to open the windows a bit more and try to have some routinized connections with a) the other RALOs to know what issues they're working on, see what challenges they're confronting organizationally that we might draw lessons from, etc; b) the ALAC, inter alia in order to better assess and enhance the fit with Euralo perspectives; and c) other parts of the ecosystem when merited. 2. Resolution of the role of individual users seems an important element of expanding engagement. I wonder if we might just consider drawing on/modifying to taste the relevant bits of the NARALO Operating Principles, https://community.icann.org/display/NARALO/NARALO+Operating+Principles+NA-20... Cheers Bill
Dear Wolf and all, I just got an email from the travel support staff indicating I could travel to Lisbon on the 19th of June, ie on the day of the GA. The Wiki page for the GA does not indicate at what hour the GA will start. Obviously, I do not think most of us could be in Lisbon before early afternoon on the 19th, at best. https://community.icann.org/display/EURALO/2013+EURALO+General+Assembly Please advise. Thanks Patrick Vande Walle
Hello Patrick Happy you will be with us in Lisbon.
From a previous e-mail (in February) Wolf write "The date for the next Lisbon GA is 19 June 2013 in the afternoon. The invitation covers participation at the annual EuroDIG on 20 - 21 June -- what became the European version of the IGF by now -- see http://www.eurodig.org/"
From my knowledge it will be from 17:00.
Hope it helps and I am sure Wolf will be able to confirm (or not). But I wanted you not to wait for an answer. Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com> Le 28/03/13 09:47, « Patrick Vande Walle » <patrick@vande-walle.eu> a écrit :
Dear Wolf and all,
I just got an email from the travel support staff indicating I could travel to Lisbon on the 19th of June, ie on the day of the GA. The Wiki page for the GA does not indicate at what hour the GA will start. Obviously, I do not think most of us could be in Lisbon before early afternoon on the 19th, at best.
https://community.icann.org/display/EURALO/2013+EURALO+General+Assembly
Please advise. Thanks
Patrick Vande Walle
_______________________________________________ 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
Merci, Sébastien ! Patrick "Sébastien Bachollet" <sebastien@bachollet.com> a écrit :
Hello Patrick Happy you will be with us in Lisbon.
From a previous e-mail (in February) Wolf write "The date for the next Lisbon GA is 19 June 2013 in the afternoon. The invitation covers participation at the annual EuroDIG on 20 - 21 June -- what became the European version of the IGF by now -- see http://www.eurodig.org/"
From my knowledge it will be from 17:00.
Hope it helps and I am sure Wolf will be able to confirm (or not). But I wanted you not to wait for an answer. Sébastien Bachollet +33 6 07 66 89 33 Blog: http://sebastien.bachollet.fr/ Mail: Sébastien Bachollet <sebastien@bachollet.com>
Le 28/03/13 09:47, « Patrick Vande Walle » <patrick@vande-walle.eu> a écrit :
Dear Wolf and all,
I just got an email from the travel support staff indicating I could travel to Lisbon on the 19th of June, ie on the day of the GA. The Wiki page for the GA does not indicate at what hour the GA will start. Obviously, I do not think most of us could be in Lisbon before early afternoon on the 19th, at best.
https://community.icann.org/display/EURALO/2013+EURALO+General+Assembly
Please advise. Thanks
Patrick Vande Walle
_______________________________________________ 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
Cordialement Best regards Patrick Vande Walle -- Envoyé de mon téléphone. Excusez la brièveté. Sent from my phone. Apologies for the brevety.
Dear Wolf, thanks for the compilation. Regarding the questions, here some input for the sake of giving away ideas and facilitate discussion. - How to improve member participation at EURALO and its regular activities? - How to better represent the voice and interests of European users in At-Large and ICANN?" what about a short survey so ALSs can gather data amongst their members and citizens so then, set priorities ? Writing a survey with also open questions to be sure to capture bottom-up feedback, not just top-down closed proposals. No idea on your areas, but here the trend seems to be privacy, open data, net neutrality and too strong copyright laws. Items more related to DNS could be: - how is that, having millions of domains under their management, certain gTLDs have been allowed to raise prices and they are doing so year after year ? How does this benefit users? - Whois debate and right to privacy. EU data privacy laws conflict with ICANN's regarding whois. A model similar to the one being used by .fr or .cat (who needs to know has full access to whois data) might make sense.
- How can we better link the levels of At-Large and ALAC?
Not too sure about it, but just to start the conversation: May be getting more people involved and teaming up where experienced ALAC members team up and coach certain ALSs ?
- How can ALS activities be linked to ICANN discussions and the other way round?
ICANN easily sets the agenda at every move (RAA, new gTLDs, PDP, ...). ALS should be able also to put some other issues on the table and get them discussed. May be getting more people on board leading more issues might help, but at the same time it is not easy for small ALS to devote too many resources (people) to these debates. To ease learning curve, perhaps having teams of 2 or 3 people leading an issue, where one is experienced and the rest just new or less experienced may help to get more people engaged, so more available to lead ALS proposed issues. my 2 cents cheers jordi Al 20/03/13 01:05, En/na Wolf Ludwig ha escrit:
Dear all,
as discussed and agreed tonight at our monthly call (under agenda point 7), we need to draft the **content part** of our Lisbon GA agenda until our April call (in about four weeks). And as said before, we would like to have broad community inputs and proposals for this agenda drafting.
There is some agreement already that our Lisbon discussion should focus on "How to improve member participation at EURALO and its regular activities?" and "How to better represent the voice and interests of European users in At-Large and ICANN?"
Some suggestions were already made by some members -- a compilation of these proposals and comments you will find below. Please have a look on it. More inputs, comments and the like are welcome to organize a vivid debate in Lisbon reflecting the questions and concerns of the whole EURALO community!
Thanks for your support and kind regards, Wolf
_____ Compilation of inputs and suggestions for the Lisbon agenda (received so far):
Yrjö wrote 19 March: Sandra's list of questions is a good basis for discussing how to improve the participation of European ALS's in dealing with substantive, sometimes even operational issues like .health. There may be more of that kind when the new gTLD process goes on. Such a discussion is urgently needed. As it was suggested tonight on the EURALO call, we have to concentrate on issues that are of real importance to end users. We don't need to spend precious time of our calls on issues that are far removed from that context, very few of us even understand and nobody wants to comment on. I hope we could devote a part of each call to a substantive discussion on whatever issue is deemed to be important from an end user point of view. As far as communication tools are concerned, the simpler the better. Plain old e-mail is OK, if the topic is interesting enough. As ALS's, we have to try to find out what internet end users in our country/area really think about issues at stake. We are not opinion research institutions and can't afford to commission such studies. But we have our contacts, our networks, our ability to raise an issue and stir a debate. My 2 (€)cents,
Bill wrote 19 March: Sandra's proposal makes a lot of sense to me.
Oksana wrote 19 March: I would like to support all Sandra's proposition and to add some more aspects.
Situation with .health was really very illustrative. ICANN was extremely interested to know what we all (including Ukrainian ALSes) think on this objection process. I do not know anybody in Ukraine, who cares about this .health (except Alexander Kondaurov, who, as a member of WG, spent a lot of his time and efforts to analyze this issue).
At the same time, nobody in ICANN is interested to know, what we, Ukrainian ALSes, think about the delegation of Ukrainian IDN .ykp. http://www.icann.org/en/groups/board/documents/resolutions-28feb13-en.htm#2....
Despite we shared with a lot of ICANN/ALAC/At-Large representatives all our concerns regarding this delegation. Of course we have our own responsibility for missing the agenda of this Board meeting. But even now, what transparency and accountability we are talking about? How did Sebastien vote in this case? How did Bertrand vote? What documents were submitted to the board by Ukrainian applicant?
Now both EMP and InAU are members of the Advisory Committee on top level domains at National Regulator. And we really would like to help to bridge different national stakeholders between themselves and with ICANN. In more general case, it is the question how national ALSes can help in communication between ICANN and end users regarding national issues. Do ALSes have any additional rights, responsibilities, tools of communication or even dispute resolutions?
Once again - I do not propose just now to discuss any specific issues. Just the role of any ALS regarding both ICANN and local Internet community.
Sandra wrote 14 March: I propose we discuss how the participation process within EURALO can be improved or revitalised. The .health objection process was a good example that there is no working mechanism to gather feedback form At-Large or have a discussion on an issue where the ALAC is supposed to vote on in the interest of the end user?
Questions to be considered (but not limited to): - Are ALSes aware of the issues currently under discussion at ALAC / ICANN? If not, why? - How can EURALO fulfil it's mandate to represent the end user voice? - How can we better link the levels of At-Large and ALAC? - Is email the right communication tool, if not what are the alternatives? Are there any? - How can ALS activities be linked to ICANN discussions and the other way round?
Dick Kalkmann wrote 10 March: On point I like to mention. I support democratization, transparency and improved participation initiatives within ICANN. At this moment I'm also looking at the possibilities to improve the participation of the Dutch internet community within ICANN. I'm very interested to discuss all those issues in Lisbon.
Christoph Bruch wrote 7 February: Obviously some EURALO member organizations engage very little and of course one could imagine to attract more member organizations in order strengthen EURALO's voice.
I therefore welcome the initiative on inreach, which - I believe – will encompass aspects also relevant for outreach.
My message is simple: EURALO will be primarily attractive to organizations/individuals who can afford to spend a lot of time for this engagement if it continues to operate in the way it has been done in the past years.
This is meant as observation not as criticism!
This translates to: Increasing the involvement of the silent members will be dependent on being able to offer meaningful modes of participation which consume little time.
Talking about options for "limited" participation is my suggestion for the agenda in Lisbon.
EuroDIG Secretariat http://www.eurodig.org/ mobile +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig
EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org
Profile on LinkedIn http://ch.linkedin.com/in/wolfludwig
_______________________________________________ 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
-- Jordi Iparraguirre http://twitter.ipa.cat http://linkedin.ipa.cat
participants (5)
-
Jordi Iparraguirre -
Patrick Vande Walle -
Sébastien Bachollet -
William Drake -
Wolf Ludwig