Apologies for not being able to participate at the conference at that time - I'll by flying back from holiday at that hour. Looking fw to the next call, Adela Danciu APTI Romania On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 4:39 AM, Gisella Gruber-White < Gisella.Gruber-White@icann.org> wrote:

Dear All,

Further to the Doodle Poll, the next EURALO call is confirmed on Tuesday 04 August 2009 at 1600 UTC.

The draft agenda and the call details can be found at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?04_august_2009

If you require dial-outs, please email us at: staff@atlarge.icann.org

Thank you and have a good weekend.

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

Following our conference call yesterday I would like to make a proposition regarding the Brochure. Can each of us write 2 or 3 raisons they are participating to Euralo / At Large and ultimately ICANN? Each point could be in 2 or 3 lines. I hope it will allow us to choose some of those texts to have a more lively document. Thanks for your feedback. All the best Sébastien Bachollet Président d'honneur - Isoc France sebastien.bachollet@isoc.fr www.egeni.org www.isoc.fr  

-----Message d'origine----- De : euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:euro-discuss- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] De la part de At-Large Staff Envoyé : lundi 3 août 2009 12:48 À : Discussion for At-Large Europe Objet : [EURO-Discuss] REMINDER / EURALO call - tomorrow Tuesday 04.08.09 @ 1600 UTC

Dear All,

Further to the Doodle Poll, the next EURALO call is confirmed tomorrow, Tuesday 04 August 2009 at 1600 UTC.

The draft agenda and the call details can be found at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?04_august_2009

If you require dial-outs, please email us at: staff@atlarge.icann.org

Thank you and have a good weekend.

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber- White ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge- lists.i cann.org

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge- lists.icann.org

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

Dear staff, Please put me on the dial-out list. Phone number: +32 488 627192 Ditto for the call with Rod Beckstrom later that day. Thank you Patrick On Mon, 17 Aug 2009 10:01:43 +0100, At-Large Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org> wrote:

Dear All,

The next EURALO call is scheduled tomorrow, Tuesday 18 August 2009 at 1600 UTC.

The draft agenda and the call details can be found at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?18_august_2009

If you require dial-outs, please email us at: staff@atlarge.icann.org

Thank you,

Regards,

Regards,

Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

-- Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu Twitter: http://twitter.vande-walle.eu Identica: http://identica.vande-walle.eu

Dear All ** Reminder ** Due to many members attending the EuroDIG and in discussion with Wolf and Dessi, the September EURALO call has been rescheduled to WEDNESDAY 23 September 2009 at 1600 UTC. The draft agenda and call details can be found at: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?23_september_2009 If you require dial-outs, please let us know at: staff@atlarge.icann.org. Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart, Heidi Ullrich, Matthias Langenegger, Gisella Gruber-White ICANN At-Large Staff email: staff@atlarge.icann.org

Hi Bill, I'd like you, EURALO and the ALAC to be very aware of a single point of concern to me in the Blog reply /thread you made in the link provided below... specifically the following... PLease note that Robyn as Chair of NCUC wrote to me in email appointing you as the NCUC liaison (i.e. advising me of you offer) I replied to her message with copy to staff, copy to ExCom list (PUBLIC) within minutes of the receipt of this advice and announced at the following ExCom and then full ALAC Meeting(s) that a Liaison from NCUC was most welcome and that you in my opinion with your involvement with EURALO a perfect fit for the Job, and expected in fact that you would be well aware of this reply as well as would have attended (if available) or reviewed our meetings since then (you are already on the relevant lists get notices links to agenda's etc.,) where the ALAC has discussed that we will need to appoint a Liaison to the NCSG (with the existing NCUC being a constituent part of that under the current model were working with) or review later complaints to us from both our previous NCUC Liaisons did not motivate us to appoint a replacement to Beau for a month or so before this change would need to occur any way in our view... Also the ALAC discussed that as we will attend the User House meeting and (with the exception of the single purpose IRT issue and our Joint Response / work activity that enveloped our time (and was conducted in the scheduled meeting time for NCUC and ALAC in Sydney) meetings since Mexico ( well Cairo actually) have been a duplication of effort and topic and that as we had a very full set of demands in our Seoul agenda, and as ALAC and RALO leaders had complained about the workload and requested more time to address policy development matters; unless Robyn proposed a topic that required a specific F2F between the NCUC as a GNSO constituency and our AC then we would only schedule the User House meeting and use the time for other priority meetings... In my reply to Robyn et.al and welcoming you as an NCUC Liaison to the ALAC I also covered off (in shorter form) all of that as well... Why you have not been made aware of all this immediate and welcoming response to your offer from the ALAC however I can not say. "For my part, I offered almost a month ago to serve as a liaison but never got a reply from ALAC, and am now told that they've decided they don't need to liaise with NCUC. And to my knowledge there's no NCUC-ALAC meeting planned for Seoul. Hard to see how this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here, but whatever, I guess. " CLO 2009/9/23 William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch>

Hello,

I see on the agenda item 3, "ALAC response to recent activities of the NCUC."

Given the general lack of NCUC-ALAC dialogue and information sharing, I'm guessing that not everybody will be equally aware of the background. To that end, the following links might be worth perusing prior to the discussion.

http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/9/22/4329523.html

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ncuc-to-beckstrom-18aug09-en.pdf

Thanks,

Bill

PS: I will probably have to leave the call after an hour

*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

-- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)

Wolf thanks for the update on the EURALO proposal from it's meeting regarding this Agenda item and I assume it will be brought forward for the ALAC to consider... But just to be very clear *if* you are attributing the sentence below "..."this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here" ..." to me that is *not correct* that is a Statement from Bill which I quoted in my earlier message and indeed I would not and will not make that sort of predictive or value laden statement on such a volatile topic especially as ALAC Chair... ALAC has for several years had a Liaison from the ALAC to the NCUC (this was of course a natural fit as NCUC was in the pre-restructured GNSO time, the clear place and mechanism for individual internet user and non commercial registrant input into GNSO PDP and other processes); all ALAC meetings are open but we (ALAC and individuals in it) have welcomed the proposal from NCUC in recent times to formalize a NCUC Liaison to our AC (adding to several other sent from other parts of ICANN) this and our reciprocal arrangements decision has been covered by other messages including from Alan Greenberg and myself earlier so I won't repeat here. However in those in those interchanges (or referenced to them) I believe you will see from ALAC nothing but an intention to work with all parts of ICANN *including existing and future GNSO constituencies* that affect and effect our role as outlined in the ALAC Review final Report "10. ALAC as the representative body for At Large is the primary organisational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN processes, although ICANN’s multi stakeholder model provides opportunity for individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process." ( http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf p6) as if for no other reason to do otherwise would be maladaptive and counterproductive. I will be making these statement again to the ALAC when we consider whatever proposal or suggestions EURALO has resolved today at its meeting, but I have taken the time to cover them here as well as it obviously is important that we separate hearsay and assumption from intention and desired outcome (from ALAC's point if view) at all stages of these discussions. CLO 2009/9/24 Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig@comunica-ch.net>

Hi Cheryl and all,

thanks for your background infos on tonight's EURALO call what, I think, is helpful to correct some misinterpretations. Let me take your last sentence or questioning assumption that "this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here" and add the conclusion of our call tonight:

We are aware that the recent development is more than delicate and the situation is difficult to be understood by many observers (at least at EURALO) who were not closely involved. What we felt is the need to overcome this confrontation leading to nowhere but a deadlock and to try to de-escalate the given situation. At our call tonight we were seeking for options how the relations between ALAC and NCUC could be calmed and improved again, and the nomination of Bill as a Liaison person between both could offer such an opportunity. As you confirmed in your previous response already, Bill offers with his "involvement with EURALO (and NCUC - GNSO) a perfect fit for the Job". If Bill - with support from EURALO - could assume a mediation role in this matter, we will try our best. As we know, the deadline for organising "official" meetings in Seoul has passed already but there should still be opportunities for "informal" ones.

Let's try to discuss, define and find ways out and solutions together. Thanks and best regards, Wolf

Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:55:

...

Hi Bill, I'd like you, EURALO and the ALAC to be very aware of a single point of concern to me in the Blog reply /thread you made in the link provided below... specifically the following... PLease note that Robyn as Chair of NCUC wrote to me in email appointing you as the NCUC liaison (i.e. advising me of you offer) I replied to her message with copy to staff, copy to ExCom list (PUBLIC) within minutes of the receipt of this advice and announced at the following ExCom and then full ALAC Meeting(s) that a Liaison from NCUC was most welcome and that you in my opinion with your involvement with EURALO a perfect fit for the Job, and expected in fact that you would be well aware of this reply as well as would have attended (if available) or reviewed our meetings since then (you are already on the relevant lists get notices links to agenda's etc.,) where the ALAC has discussed that we will need to appoint a Liaison to the NCSG (with the existing NCUC being a constituent part of that under the current model were working with) or review later complaints to us from both our previous NCUC Liaisons did not motivate us to appoint a replacement to Beau for a month or so before this change would need to occur any way in our view... Also the ALAC discussed that as we will attend the User House meeting and (with the exception of the single purpose IRT issue and our Joint Response / work activity that enveloped our time (and was conducted in the scheduled meeting time for NCUC and ALAC in Sydney) meetings since Mexico ( well Cairo actually) have been a duplication of effort and topic and that as we had a very full set of demands in our Seoul agenda, and as ALAC and RALO leaders had complained about the workload and requested more time to address policy development matters; unless Robyn proposed a topic that required a specific F2F between the NCUC as a GNSO constituency and our AC then we would only schedule the User House meeting and use the time for other priority meetings... In my reply to Robyn et.al and welcoming you as an NCUC Liaison to the ALAC I also covered off (in shorter form) all of that as well... Why you have not been made aware of all this immediate and welcoming response to your offer from the ALAC however I can not say. "For my part, I offered almost a month ago to serve as a liaison but never got a reply from ALAC, and am now told that they've decided they don't need to liaise with NCUC. And to my knowledge there's no NCUC-ALAC meeting planned for Seoul. Hard to see how this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here, but whatever, I guess. "

CLO

2009/9/23 William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch>

...

Hello,

I see on the agenda item 3, "ALAC response to recent activities of the NCUC."

Given the general lack of NCUC-ALAC dialogue and information sharing, I'm guessing that not everybody will be equally aware of the background. To that end, the following links might be worth perusing prior to the discussion.

http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/9/22/4329523.html

...

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ncuc-to-beckstrom-18aug09-en.pdf

Thanks,

Bill

PS: I will probably have to leave the call after an hour

*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

-- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) _______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig www.comunica-ch.net

Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch -

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org

-- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO)

Dear Wolfgang: There is in fact a quite detailed follow-up process, which was announced some time ago. You may find it on www.atlarge.icann.org under announcements, linked here for convenience: http://www.atlarge.icann.org/announcements/announcement-26mar09-en.htm Kleinwächter, Wolfgang wrote:

Dear Cheryl

is there any formalized fllow up from ATLAS I? How ALAC deals with the Mexico Recommendations? There were so many substantial issues which needs continuous efforts. We have to move from big words to clear actions. Who checks the progress and what is the planning for "regional summits" and ATLAS II in 2011?

Thanks

wolfgang

________________________________

Von: euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org im Auftrag von Cheryl Langdon-Orr Gesendet: Do 24.09.2009 03:36 An: Discussion for At-Large Europe Cc: At-Large Staff Betreff: Re: [EURO-Discuss] Background for tonight's Euralo call

Wolf thanks for the update on the EURALO proposal from it's meeting regarding this Agenda item and I assume it will be brought forward for the ALAC to consider... But just to be very clear *if* you are attributing the sentence below "..."this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here" ..." to me that is *not correct* that is a Statement from Bill which I quoted in my earlier message and indeed I would not and will not make that sort of predictive or value laden statement on such a volatile topic especially as ALAC Chair... ALAC has for several years had a Liaison from the ALAC to the NCUC (this was of course a natural fit as NCUC was in the pre-restructured GNSO time, the clear place and mechanism for individual internet user and non commercial registrant input into GNSO PDP and other processes); all ALAC meetings are open but we (ALAC and individuals in it) have welcomed the proposal from NCUC in recent times to formalize a NCUC Liaison to our AC (adding to several other sent from other parts of ICANN) this and our reciprocal arrangements decision has been covered by other messages including from Alan Greenberg and myself earlier so I won't repeat here. However in those in those interchanges (or referenced to them) I believe you will see from ALAC nothing but an intention to work with all parts of ICANN *including existing and future GNSO constituencies* that affect and effect our role as outlined in the ALAC Review final Report "10. ALAC as the representative body for At Large is the primary organisational home for the voice and concerns of the individual Internet user in ICANN processes, although ICANN's multi stakeholder model provides opportunity for individual users to choose to participate in many other ways in the ICANN process." ( http://www.icann.org/en/reviews/alac/final-report-alac-review-09jun09-en.pdf p6) as if for no other reason to do otherwise would be maladaptive and counterproductive.

I will be making these statement again to the ALAC when we consider whatever proposal or suggestions EURALO has resolved today at its meeting, but I have taken the time to cover them here as well as it obviously is important that we separate hearsay and assumption from intention and desired outcome (from ALAC's point if view) at all stages of these discussions.

CLO

2009/9/24 Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig@comunica-ch.net>

...

Hi Cheryl and all,

thanks for your background infos on tonight's EURALO call what, I think, is helpful to correct some misinterpretations. Let me take your last sentence or questioning assumption that "this is going to go anywhere but downhill from here" and add the conclusion of our call tonight:

We are aware that the recent development is more than delicate and the situation is difficult to be understood by many observers (at least at EURALO) who were not closely involved. What we felt is the need to overcome this confrontation leading to nowhere but a deadlock and to try to de-escalate the given situation. At our call tonight we were seeking for options how the relations between ALAC and NCUC could be calmed and improved again, and the nomination of Bill as a Liaison person between both could offer such an opportunity. As you confirmed in your previous response already, Bill offers with his "involvement with EURALO (and NCUC - GNSO) a perfect fit for the Job". If Bill - with support from EURALO - could assume a mediation role in this matter, we will try our best. As we know, the deadline for organising "official" meetings in Seoul has passed already but there should still be opportunities for "informal" ones.

Let's try to discuss, define and find ways out and solutions together. Thanks and best regards, Wolf

Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote Thu, 24 Sep 2009 04:55:

...

Hi Bill, I'd like you, EURALO and the ALAC to be very aware of a single point of concern to me in the Blog reply /thread you made in the link provided below... specifically the following... PLease note that Robyn as Chair of NCUC wrote to me in email appointing you as the NCUC liaison

(i.e.

...

advising me of you offer) I replied to her message with copy to staff,

copy

...

to ExCom list (PUBLIC) within minutes of the receipt of this advice and announced at the following ExCom and then full ALAC Meeting(s) that a Liaison from NCUC was most welcome and that you in my opinion with your involvement with EURALO a perfect fit for the Job, and expected in fact

that

...

you would be well aware of this reply as well as would have attended (if available) or reviewed our meetings since then (you are already on the relevant lists get notices links to agenda's etc.,) where the ALAC has discussed that we will need to appoint a Liaison to the NCSG (with the existing NCUC being a constituent part of that under the current model

were

...

working with) or review later complaints to us from both our previous NCUC Liaisons did not motivate us to appoint a replacement to Beau for a month

or

...

so before this change would need to occur any way in our view... Also

the

...

ALAC discussed that as we will attend the User House meeting and (with the exception of the single purpose IRT issue and our Joint Response / work activity that enveloped our time (and was conducted in the scheduled

meeting

...

time for NCUC and ALAC in Sydney) meetings since Mexico ( well Cairo actually) have been a duplication of effort and topic and that as we had a very full set of demands in our Seoul agenda, and as ALAC and RALO leaders had complained about the workload and requested more time to address

policy

...

development matters; unless Robyn proposed a topic that required a

specific

...

F2F between the NCUC as a GNSO constituency and our AC then we would only schedule the User House meeting and use the time for other priority meetings... In my reply to Robyn et.al and welcoming you as an NCUC

Liaison

...

to the ALAC I also covered off (in shorter form) all of that as well...

Why

...

you have not been made aware of all this immediate and welcoming response

to

...

your offer from the ALAC however I can not say. "For my part, I offered almost a month ago to serve as a liaison but never got a reply from ALAC, and am now told that they've decided they don't

need

...

to liaise with NCUC. And to my knowledge there's no NCUC-ALAC meeting planned for Seoul. Hard to see how this is going to go anywhere but

downhill

...

from here, but whatever, I guess. "

...

CLO

2009/9/23 William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch>

...

Hello,

I see on the agenda item 3, "ALAC response to recent activities of the NCUC."

Given the general lack of NCUC-ALAC dialogue and information sharing,

I'm

...

...

guessing that not everybody will be equally aware of the background. To that end, the following links might be worth perusing prior to the discussion.

http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/9/22/4329523.html

...

...

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ncuc-to-beckstrom-18aug09-en.pdf

Thanks,

Bill

PS: I will probably have to leave the call after an hour

*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

...

...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org <http://www.euralo.org/>

-- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) _______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org <http://www.euralo.org/>

comunica-ch phone +41 79 204 83 87 Skype: Wolf-Ludwig www.comunica-ch.net

Digitale Allmend http://blog.allmend.ch <http://blog.allmend.ch/> -

EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation http://euralo.org <http://euralo.org/>

_______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org

http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org <http://www.euralo.org/>

-- Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) _______________________________________________ EURO-Discuss mailing list EURO-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.i...

Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org <http://www.euralo.org/>

-- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 301-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

H CLO, Changing the subject line to reflect the content and copying the NCUC list, as the issues under discussion do not pertain just to the EURALO. I'm not sure which of the multiple ALAC lists would be best to forward this to, please advise. Of course, whether anyone anywhere will actually have the patience to plough through this epic I don't know, but it's good to say it the record. On your first point, the liaison question: On Sep 23, 2009, at 8:55 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote:

Hi Bill, I'd like you, EURALO and the ALAC to be very aware of a single point of concern to me in the Blog reply /thread you made in the link provided below... specifically the following... PLease note that Robyn as Chair of NCUC wrote to me in email appointing you as the NCUC liaison (i.e. advising me of you offer) I replied to her message with copy to staff, copy to ExCom list (PUBLIC) within minutes of the receipt of this advice and announced at the following ExCom and then full ALAC Meeting(s) that a Liaison from NCUC was most welcome and that you in my opinion with your involvement with EURALO a perfect fit for the Job, and expected in fact that you would be well aware of this reply as well as would have attended (if available) or reviewed our meetings since then (you are already on the relevant lists get notices links to agenda's etc.,) where the ALAC has discussed that we will need to appoint a Liaison to the NCSG (with the existing NCUC being a constituent part of that under the current model were working with) or review later complaints to us from both our previous NCUC Liaisons did not motivate us to appoint a replacement to Beau for a month or so before this change would need to occur any way in our view...

I think I've correctly parsed this sentence and traced the trajectory of the disconnect. On 1 Sept. Robin wrote to you

On 01/09/2009, Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> wrote:

...

Dear Cheryl, Alan, and Nick:

We are saddened by the recent breakdown in communication between members of NCUC and the At-Large community and hope we can work to resolve any differences through open dialogue and a shared commitment to improving civil society participation at ICANN.

Therefore we have appointed William Drake to serve as a liaison between NCUC and ALAC in the spirt of encouraging an open exchange of communication and an effort to prevent any future misunderstandings between the organizations....

To which you replied

...

From: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@gmail.com> Date: August 31, 2009 9:34:46 PM PDT To: Robin Gross <robin@ipjustice.org> Cc: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>, Nick Ashton-Hart <Nick.Ashton-Hart@icann.org

...

, William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch>, "Non- Commercial Users Constituency Executive Committee & GNSO Reps. Discussion" <ncu-exec@ipjustice.org>, ALAC Internal List <alac-internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org , ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Subject: Re: NCUC-ALAC Liaison to Encourage Open Communication

Robyn, thank you for asking the ALAC to consider accepting a Liaison from the existing Non Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)...

This concept/ proposal is one which, whilst we have not ever discused either internaly in the ALAC, nor in any of our recent meetings with NCUC, is one I'm confident the ALAC, RALO's and wider At-Large will no doubt welcome, and Bill of course, seems to be a 'natural fit' for the task...

Of course all our meetings (with rare exceptions) are open so without any formal 'ALAC approval' or role creation he is of course *more than welcome* I will ask Staff to ensure he is subscribed to the relevant lists and that he gets notice of our meetings, briefings etc,. Of course as a EURALO Board Member he should be familiar with the ALAC's ROP's etc,. but I'll also get staff to see if he wishes a briefing call with us to discuss anything re these or other matters.

So I said On Sep 1, 2009, at 2:36 PM, William Drake wrote:

Hi,

Thanks, Cheryl and Robin. I'd be happy to try and help increase the level of information flow and mutual understanding. Any and all background info and so on would of course be most helpful.

I didn't get a reply to this. So what I had to go on was Robin saying NCUC has appointed me, and you saying thanks for "asking the ALAC to consider accepting" me and that I could join those lists that are open to anyone (but not those that are not). The latter didn't sound like a formal agreement to liaise, so I assumed I was to await word on a decision. Three weeks went by, no word, and in the meanwhile I was not added to the relevant closed lists or did not get any briefings etc. From today's mail (reproduced with permission) I see why,

On Sep 23, 2009, at 8:47 PM, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:

...

I'm sorry Alan and Bill (and Cheryl).

I did not get from Cheryl's email that we were to subscribe Bill to either of the ALAC-only lists, that's why he wasn't subscribed. Am I to understand you want Bill subscribed to both ALAC and ALAC- Internal?

Hence, while I gather from your post you felt you'd said yes, I think you can see that this wasn't clear to either me/NCUC or staff. Anyway, the weeks rolled by, and then I saw Sebastian at the IGF meeting in Geneva. I understood him to say that ALAC actually had not decided whether it wanted or needed to liaise with NCUC, since we'd said that NCUC would be dissolved if we got a properly configured NCSG charter.(see below*) I pointed out that this was still up in the air, so NCUC would be around for the foreseeable future and we ought to be liaising. The next day we spoke again and Sebastian said well, probably we should liaise with NCSG, not with NCUC, no? I repeated that the actually existing entities ought to be in communication etc. So, this is why I said yesterday in the blog post that I'd gotten no reply and understood ALAC had decided against. Chalk it up to miscommunication. Hence I was pleased yesterday that on our EURALO board call Sebastian said in fact ALAC wants to do it, and to receive your message here. And now I've just received subscribe messages to the ALAC and ALAC-internal lists. So voila! When the NCSG situation starts to take more shape we can revisit what's the best way to maintain bidirectional communication flow going forward. On the EURALO call, we also discussed whether it wouldn't be good to also have a link running the other way, ALAC=>NCUC. Adam was suggested as a logical candidate, although this might take some arm twisting, especially after yesterday's various back and forths. Personally I think it'd make a lot of sense to have him if he's willing. [*Just to clarify: IF we could have a charter in line with the NCUC- proposed version, in which constituencies are easily formed and collaborate in a non-fragmentation-producing structure, THEN it would make sense for NCUC to dissolve and its members to form various issue- specific constituencies, e.g. on privacy, freedom of speech, etc. As you know, we have asked the board to collaborate with us to review the charter issues and arrive at a mutually acceptable formulation. Unless and until we get there, it would not make sense to dissolve NCUC, inter alia because launching new constituencies now would lock in the dysfunctional staff/SIC charter, as NCUC noted in its letter to the board. This is just one reason why I'd have thought it'd have made sense for you to back the NCUC version rather than the staff/SIC version, but what do I know.] On your second point, the meeting in Seoul question:

Also the ALAC discussed that as we will attend the User House meeting and (with the exception of the single purpose IRT issue and our Joint Response / work activity that enveloped our time (and was conducted in the scheduled meeting time for NCUC and ALAC in Sydney) meetings since Mexico ( well Cairo actually) have been a duplication of effort and topic and that as we had a very full set of demands in our Seoul agenda, and as ALAC and RALO leaders had complained about the workload and requested more time to address policy development matters; unless Robyn proposed a topic that required a specific F2F between the NCUC as a GNSO constituency and our AC then we would only schedule the User House meeting and use the time for other priority meetings... In my reply to Robyn et.al and welcoming you as an NCUC Liaison to the ALAC I also covered off (in shorter form) all of that as well... Why you have not been made aware of all this immediate and welcoming response to your offer from the ALAC however I can not say.

I saw that but didn't know how to read it. I would suggest that NCUC- ALAC cooperation in the new NCSG and beyond is a pretty worthy topic that requires a F2F, one that has several readily tractable parts (e.g. identifying substantive issues where there's probably sufficient alignment of views that we could develop joint positions, perhaps starting with the registrants' rights charter) and some more difficult but important to talk through parts (e.g. preferences and perceptions on the charter, constituencies, etc). But perhaps it might make sense to consider alternatives to the traditional format? Maybe something facilitated by a third party, or from the bottom up? Or failing that, maybe we could just schedule something in a bar or resto and try for a less formal and on-guard mindset all around? Wolf suggested that perhaps some folks from EURALO (e.g. Sebastian, Wolf, Adam and myself) could try to think through a workable option. If you and others in ALAC are open to considering suggestions, I'm sure NCUC would be too. More than enough for now. Cheers, Bill

2009/9/23 William Drake <william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch>

...

Hello,

I see on the agenda item 3, "ALAC response to recent activities of the NCUC."

Given the general lack of NCUC-ALAC dialogue and information sharing, I'm guessing that not everybody will be equally aware of the background. To that end, the following links might be worth perusing prior to the discussion.

http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2009/9/22/4329523.html

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/ncuc-to-beckstrom-18aug09-en.pdf

Thanks,

Bill

PS: I will probably have to leave the call after an hour

*********************************************************** William J. Drake Senior Associate Centre for International Governance Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies Geneva, Switzerland william.drake@graduateinstitute.ch www.graduateinstitute.ch/cig/drake.html ***********************************************************