Feb. 6, 2017
2 a.m.
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re:? = Utf-8 q reviewedSeptember = C3 = B3n_At-Large = Desde: asoto@ibero-americano.org I suggest that WG is divided by articles or chapters. In a period to be determined, to hold a meeting for everyone to discuss. Also, if someone does not have time and are interested in a particular topic, analyze it on their own. At the scheduled meeting, you can participate with your comments. Regards!! Alberto\u2063 Sent from BlueMail On Feb. 5. 2017 9:44 pm at 9:44 pm, Harold Arcos <harold.arcos@gmail.com> wrote: > Ladies and I agree with some of the criticisms and > Comments on the report submitted by ITEMS. > > I think this is a time-milestone in the history of the community > At-Large of which we are part why I want to submit to > your > Consideration that we form a group of discussion that allows us > share > The opinions and criticism of the report exceeds asynchrony > the > Emails and monthly meetings that our Ralo > only > Are two (2) until the closing date for comment. > > The ability to introduce our individual contributions is open > < https://www.icann.org/news/announcement-2017-02-02-en> > by > Our part as Ralo would be very enriching regional discussion. > > Fraternal greetings > > > > > 05.02.2017 1:16 GMT-04: 00 Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> : > >> My first thought on this paragraph. >> >> Dice "Rationale" but gives no foundation as a > user >> Individual perform a task better than ALS, and that many or > many >> Individual users will do better than a coordinated THIN.Neither > have >> A mere estimate of how many individual users will be incorporated, > Or >> That time unit have considered. >> >> An individual user can have the same possibility of coordinating > A >> Event with a university, or a government, like an ALS? > Will >> The same response from these institutions? >> >>'s Clear we have problems, but it seems that the new system > what >> Solutions, and even less to do if it becomes a bad to >> Modification. >> >> There are many points to be alone on this paragraph yet. He > report >> Has more than 90 pages. >> >> None of these concerns I have raised to ITEMS, obtained > Response. >> >> >> >> Best regards >> >> >> >> Alberto >> >> >> >> * From: * lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto: >> Lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] * On behalf of > * Antonio >> Medina Gómez >> * Sent: * Saturday, February 4, 2017 1:26 PM >> * To: * Humberto Carrasco <hcarrascob@gmail.com> >> * CC: * LACRALO Spanish <lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org> >> * Subject: * Re: [lac-discuss-en] Review At-Large >> >> >> >> Humberto thank you very much for this timely contribution, which allows > understanding >> The new structure and especially the commitment and participation > Active. >> >> Best regards >> >> >> >> On 04/02/2017 11:15 "Humberto Carrasco" <hcarrascob@gmail.com> > He wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> >> >> Aida given in nail with this new concept (structure). >> >> >> >> In relation to this new figure stated in the >> >> Report the following (my translation) (page 64 of the report). >> >> >> >> --------------------------------- >> >> * "Proposal of a" Membership Powered Model "* >> >> >> >> * Rationale * >> >> >> >> * One of the main conclusions of our review is that if > well >> The mission and the general function of At-Large are widely > supported >> Within the Community itself and ICANN, the organization > At-Large >> Has struggled to effectively engage users > Final and >> / Or ensure that more voices join end users > the >> Processes of ICANN policy. Instead, rightly > Or without >> It, the perception of a culture of law has come to dominate. > The >> End user input remains elusive. * >> >> * We recognize that the At-Large Community has made progress > significant >> In certain areas and our proposal seeks to build on this momentum >> Positive. Taking into account the views of many people > Within >> At-Large, the broader ICANN system and beyond, we have formulated a > model >> Alternative organization. * >> >> * With the title "Empowered Membership Model" (EMM), the name is >> Intended to send a clear signal to the rest of the community that At > Large >> It is ready to reform and move forward in the spirit of the transition >> Back to IANA.The EMM has been designed to eliminate what we have >> Identified as the main barriers to participation in the >> System, and in order to strengthen the commitment of the end user > within >> At-Large. * >> >> ------------------------------------------- >> >> >> >> >> >> Addition is eliminated figure ALAC and the member set > metric >> To vote and be candidates (page 66 of the report): >> >> >> >> These are the proposals summarized in this topic: >> >> >> >> A.- A ALS (ALM calls the report because it includes users >> Individual) in order to vote in an election of the leaders of ALAC > / >> THIN, must demonstrate active remote participation in a group > work >> ICANN for at least three months or provide reach and commitment > In >> Respective THIN (also suppose that at that time at least three > Months). >> >> >> >> B.It is the staff who makes the calculation or carries this metric. >> >> >> >> C.- figure removed the ALAC member elected by the RALO and > who >> Participate in ALAC should be in our case the President and >> Secretary who are elected by the region. The other ALAC member (5) > They are >> NOMCOM chosen. To be a candidate for leader of the RALO > the >> Respective ALS (ALM) must be active for at >> >> Least 12 months to be eligible. >> >> >> >> >> >> I hope I have contributed to this little comments > Contribution. >> >> >> >> Hugs >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> >> >> >> The 03/02/2017, at 23:45, Aida Noblia <aidanoblia@gmail.com> > He wrote: >> >> The issue mentioned Alberto is very important, the proposal >> ITEM equipment involves a transformation in the current structure > of >> ALs participation through formally constituted and creating a > new >> Empowered individual membership concept (EMM), which means > Is the >> Solution to finding more effective participation in > more >> Quantity and quality. >> >> >> >> The lack of English translation worries us because difficult > stage >> It should be made known and discussed sufficiently in > the >> Community. >> >> >> >> Greetings to all >> >> Aida >> >> >> >> On February 3, 2017, 22:11, Antonio Medina Gomez < >> Amedinagomez@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Alberto thank you very much. >> >> When will be available in Spanish? >> >> >> >> On 03/02/2017 19:26 "Alberto Soto" <asoto@ibero-americano.org> > He wrote: >> >> >> >> Dear, as you know, is ongoing review of At-Large >, >> Scheduled to perform every five years in the ICANN Bylaws. >> >> >> >> The purpose of this is to solicit public comment > Feedback >> The community on the draft report issued by ITEMS > International, >> On the Review of At-Large. It began on January 31 and ends on > 34 >> March 2017 23:59 >> >> Here l link for comment: https://www.icann.org/public- >> Comments / AtLarge-review-draft-report-01/02/2017-in >> >> >> >> While it is a draft that will be discussed, I ask you strongly > That >> Read, despite the extensive, and make comments. The blood count is > too >> Important to motivate our participation, and after reading, > You will see >> That possible consequence are much more important. >> >> >> >> My first observation is that given the importance it should have been >> Translated at least three languages, since it is only in English. >> I do not particularly like this lack of diversity, when ICANN > is >> Is working hard to be applied. >> >> >> >> I was part of the working group and have already dumped there my > Reviews >> Which are many. >> >> >> >> One is a model change is proposed, important > with >> Consequences on our functionality, without having informed > Despite >> It has been requested. And that influence the functionality > Compliance >> Our mission. Another is the presentation of statistics, > mi >> No valid judgment. >> >> >> >> We have agreed that we have problems, but are reviewable and > May >> Solved. >> >> >> >> I to be with little access (or no access) Internet until the day > 14 >> February. >> >> >> >> I really urge you to make a sacrifice, to read and comment. >> >> Best regards >> >> >> >> Alberto Soto >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Lac-discuss-en mailing list >> >> lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Lac-discuss-en mailing list >> >> lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - >> >> Aida Noblia >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Lac-discuss-en mailing list >> >> lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lac-discuss-en mailing list >> lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org >> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-es >> >> http://www.lacralo.org >> [[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/8fdc92303b.html --]]