Thank you for your very prompt response Chris and your commitment to engage resolving the issues. Personally I think a telephone conference most appropriate as many of us will not be present in Prague and given the urgency of this matter. I anticipate this level of attention will also be shared by LACRALO and ALAC leadership and look forward to the scheduling of this meeting post-haste. Kindest regards Cintra Sooknanan On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Chris LaHatte <chris.lahatte@icann.org>wrote:

Dear Cintra****

** **

I remain committed to assisting resolution of the working difficulties between the parties. I am available at any time to have a conference to discuss these matters. I am not sure how many will be attending Prague, but certainly that may be our next opportunity to meet in person to work through these issues. Before the meeting, I am available for a telephone conference at short notice.****

** **

Regards****

** **

Chris LaHatte****

Ombudsman****

Blog https://omblog.icann.org/****

Facebook http://www.facebook.com/ICANNOmbudsman****

** **

Confidentiality****

All matters brought before the Ombudsman shall be treated as confidential. The Ombudsman shall also take all reasonable steps necessary to preserve the privacy of, and to avoid harm to, those parties not involved in the complaint being investigated by the Ombudsman.The Ombudsman shall only make inquiries about, or advise staff or Board members of the existence and identity of, a complainant in order to further the resolution of the complaint. The Ombudsman shall take all reasonable steps necessary to ensure that if staff and Board members are made aware of the existence and identity of a complainant, they agree to maintain the confidential nature of such information, except as necessary to further the resolution of a complaint****

** **

*From:* Cintra Sooknanan [mailto:cintra.sooknanan@gmail.com] *Sent:* Wednesday, May 30, 2012 12:57 PM *To:* Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond *Cc:* LACRALO discussion list; Chris LaHatte; Tracy F. Hackshaw; Evan Leibovitch

*Subject:* Re: [lac-discuss-en] Recent LACRALO List postings****

** **

Dear Olivier, ****

** **

In the interest of transparency it is important that such complaint is sufficiently recorded and that those who such complaints are being levied against have enough scope and opportunity to publicly respond. Also it is necessary that any and all complaints are dealt with in turn to demonstrate equality, I do not have the ALAC rules of procedure in front of me (and the ICANN website is timing out at the moment) but a rule against discrimination and defining equal opportunity must be present in such an organisation (if you are able to assist with this citation I would be most grateful).****

** **

In fact for WELL OVER ONE YEAR ago the Caribbean Alses have on record (via the mailing list, the conference calls, through public comments on the wiki, face to face conversations, the General Assembly and at the ombudsman meeting) several past and ongoing complaints against LACRALO Leadership. Unfortunately such complaints have gone unanswered by the ones they are levied against and not attracted a similar immediate response even though these actions have already proved to have a debilitating effect on participation. Notwithstanding this a handful of us have sought the best interest of LACRALO, ALAC and At Large and tried to continue to work in such hostile environment in the hope that leadership (ALAC and LACRALO) will offer some solution. While these few work, they rightly continue to represent and share the interests and viewpoint of end users and some other Lacralo Members. Your email can be interpreted as an attempt to silence these interests and viewpoint, can you please clarify? ****

** **

Three weeks ago I requested and implored you and the Ombudsman (as well as LACRALO leadership) to come up with some firm path forward to avoid further degeneration and hardening of positions and while I acknowledge your confirmation that a response would come, to date we have no clear plan of action. In effect no one is asking you or the ombudsman to exercise favouritism, but in the least we expect fairness and professional conduct. ****

** **

I am a firm believer in Mediation, it is part of my job. For this reason I took the time to listen to the Ombudsman and limited my contribution at the meeting in Costa Rica, not because I thought it was a success (certainly that would not happen in one meeting) but because I was interested in his mediation style and defined objectives. To believe that the parties in the region would drive the process is foolish and for there to be no response even now is highly unprofessional. Perhaps I am mistaken, and I look forward to an explanation if it exists. If no explanation is available then please consider the blatant negligence that is being demonstrated and give immediate attention to this lacuna (perhaps by the Future Challenges Working Group). ****

** **

It is sad for me to say it, but in effect the postings you are seeing is a result of both sides finding the only recourse they can because mediation has (to this date) failed them. Let's be real, there was no excellent work from Costa Rica but a failed GA clearly demonstrating deepening divergence and bitterness, which has continued to grow due to lack of action. Further please let's recognise that there is a problem which can no longer be limited to a small select group but has bled into all of LACRALO. The ombudsman discussions must now take place with full transparency and with engagement by all members. This is a problem that exists for all of us! ** **

** **

I know this is not an easy situation and it is difficult to stay optimistic... this was not an easy email to write, but I hope you do not take the above as criticism rather as a heartfelt plead by someone who cares about the region enough to recognise there is a problem and try to find a solution.****

** **

Thank you and looking forward to your response,****

** **

Cintra****

** **

** **

** **

On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl@gih.com> wrote:****

This is the English Version. Spanish Version will be sent to the Spanish language list.

Dear All,

I have received complaints from members of the region about several recent postings on the LACRALO lists. Those postings relate to ongoing disagreements between several individuals relating their point of view regarding the running of LACRALO.

I am concerned about those postings because they do not appear to be of help towards improving Internet user input in LACRALO and in ALAC. Quite the contrary, they re-iterate established positions from several individuals and end up turning other volunteers off from being involved.

The time spent discussing these issues on the list ends up taking precedence over the time that members from the region could devote to more productive tasks such as commenting on Current Comment periods and other activities which were advertised on the ALAC-Announce list.

Some of the postings contravene parts of Rule 22 of our ALAC Rules of Procedure. They are inappropriate according to:

22.9 Unprofessional commentary, regardless of the general subject, 22.10 Postings libelous being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others, 22.11 Postings that are, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents another person,

I am not going to stand accused of taking sides, nor will I contravene the very rules I have quoted here by pointing the finger at anyone. However, I will kindly ask you all, Ladies and Gentlemen, that you please moderate your language.

We are working with ICANN staff and LACRALO leadership in order to continue on a dialog to improve relations, by making use of the neutrality and fairness of the ICANN Ombudsman who can act as a mediator. This mediation takes place out of this forum and has no place on public mailing lists.

An excellent amount of work has taken place in Costa Rica and the region should be looking at building on this. Like every region, this takes a lot of time and effort. We, the At-Large community and ICANN as a whole, have some serious challenges coming up in the form of a threat to the multi-stakeholder system. We clearly have to work smarter with each other.

Yours sincerely,

Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair

_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en****

** **

Dear Roosevelt, thank you for your kind follow-up. Please be so kind to find my answers in-line. On 30/05/2012 08:49, Roosevelt King wrote :

Dear Mr. Crepin-Leblond,

I was not aware that there was an English list and a Spanish list. I must therefore ask if there is a German list, a Russian list, a French list a Scandinavian list, etc? Is there a list for every language in all the regions? Why have regions that are so split up?

It all happened before my time so I don't know.

Let me say Mr. Crepin-Lablond, that I find your post rather threatening, insulting and typical of one who would seek to shut up others rather than listen to and act on a genuine complaint. Is this a case of the victim being turned into the culprit? As Chair of ALAC, it is in your interest to seek to resolve problems that will arise within the machinery of ICANN as in any organisation.

To try to ascribe blame, fault, misbehaviour and throw out charges of discrimination and lack of professional conduct is not to recognise that there is a problem or at best try to quash the problem by dictatorial means. Furthermore, while stating that you are not choosing sides, proceeds to speak of established positions. But seeing that the only recent postings along these lines came from the Caribbean, it means that you have chosen sides, not so?

I have never asserted such thing. The timing of my posting is such because prior to posting I have had to discuss the matter with several people including the ICANN Ombudsman and the Director for At-Large. The message is intended at all parties. My interest in helping the region help itself has started from way earlier than the message I sent to the list. For your information, I was instrumental in putting together the deal with other RALOs as well as with ICANN Finance plus the Board Finance and Budget Sub-Committee, that brought you and other ALS members in Costa Rica. I believe that this was beneficial to all. I have spent more time on LACRALO problems than on any other RALO since I started tenure as Chair of the ALAC in Cartagena. I think that I have clearly recognized that there is a problem a long time ago and your assertion that I am using dictatorial means is unfounded. My note to the LACRALO list is a reminder of the posting rules. It was not meant to target anyone specifically, but I am noticing that the messages on the list are becoming more and more agressive, from *all* sides. Do you think that this reflects well on LACRALO? I don't. It is not dictatorial behaviour. I am simply assuming the function which is clearly described in Rule 22 of the ALAC Rules of Procedure.

For such a large organisation I am appalled at the state of the rules. I look at them and shudder because this can only be a tragedy waiting to happen. What makes it more appalling is the amount of legal minds within ICANN. One can only conclude that the lawyers took a back seat for whatever reason.

...and your participation in the Rule of Procedure working group is very welcome. But you'll have to also contend with consensus which may, sometimes, not go the way you prefer. I would not discount the current rules that easily. I am sure they were the result of a lot of work and a lot of discussion and, like many things in a consensus based organization, they were the best that could be achieved at the time. With the new RoP working group, there is hope that these will be enhanced.

What is clear is that ICANN is not ready for the robustness of diversity and therefore not structured to properly manage it, as is reflected in your response. What your response does is effectively say that there is no solution so shut up. That is only my humble opinion, but the proof of the pudding is in the eating. As victims within LACRALO, we are now left to feel that we are victims within ALAC as well.

I assure you that you are not a victim within ALAC. With all due respect, my response is quite the opposite from what you have understood. I am suggesting we find a solution together as a smaller group of people who are affected by this, making use of an ICANN-supplied mediator, Chris LaHatte, but also Elad Levinson whom I understand everyone really enjoyed working with in Costa Rica. What I am trying to avoid is a tit-for-tat exchange of angry public emails which will only lead to: - more angry words - an eventual self-destruction of the whole region by having member ALSes leave ICANN has spent serious staff resources on the subject so far and I have been assured that this high level of support will continue. But it is a two-way process, Roosevelt. Everyone needs to work together to find a solution.

This is a source of disappointment and cause for serious concern at the deeper polarisation this may likely cause. The Caribbean has serious difficulty relating to LA as a region and without any attempt to resolve the crisis within LACRALO, it may well turn out to be LARALO. How does this square with the mandate of ICANN to include all users?

The internal problems of LACRALO in bringing the voice of all of its members only affect any subject where a vote is required. I concede that this would affect selection of its ALAC members and its RALO leadership. This is what the regional leadership should be working on. I remind you that you are able to comment directly on any statement the ALAC is drafting. In fact, you strike me as someone who would be perfect to hold the pen on some of the ALAC's statements. Furthermore, you are able to join any ALAC working group, or indeed also be part of any GNSO Council working group that allows for non-GNSO folk to join. Kind regards, Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond ALAC Chair