Re: [lac-discuss-en] lac-discuss-en Digest, Vol 90, Issue 72
Hi Mr Alberto Soto, how are you? I want to work with you Haitian legislation in technological matters, knowing that a bill is filed to the Haitian parliament as being responsible for commite AtLarge Jean Bernard AHI ( Association Haitienne des Internautes) 2016-02-22 17:48 GMT-08:00 <lac-discuss-en-request@atlarge-lists.icann.org>:
Send lac-discuss-en mailing list submissions to lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to lac-discuss-en-request@atlarge-lists.icann.org
You can reach the person managing the list at lac-discuss-en-owner@atlarge-lists.icann.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of lac-discuss-en digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: Outreach and Engagement SC (Dev Anand Teelucksingh) 2. Re: Outreach and Engagement SC (Alberto Soto)
---------- Message transféré ---------- From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> To: LACRALO discussion list <lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:20:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC Alberto, you continue to misrepresent the situation, which is unfortunate. I have already posted information ( http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2016-January/014205.... ) and again have the emails from you and Humberto on these matters and thus the evidence to contradict your statements.
Unfortunately, the At-Large doesn't have much time to have calls with interpretation but I'll ask At-Large Staff if there are any opportunities for a conference call with interpretation on Thursday 25 February or Friday 26 February and if so, ask for a Doodle to be sent. This call would be with the LACRALO members of the Outreach and Engagement SC, yourself and LACRALO representatives and anyone else in LACRALO interested on identifying outreach events in LAC region, what would be possible CROPP proposals to send and the ongoing efforts to identify possible stakeholders in the LAC region and other next steps.
Dev Anand
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:28 PM, <asoto@ibero-americano.org> wrote:
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC from: asoto@ibero-americano.org
Dear Alan, I know in detail all these rules, so realicmi order.
1. Participation Subcomitde Proyecciny
LACRALO was not consulted on the Strategic Plan for the Region. It
was
Chair approved by the SC, unlike other Ralos that could prepare and approve its own Strategic Plan, habindolo treaty internally. The Chair of the SC has no power to generally plan strategic without consultation, and allow the entire region to achieve a consensus thereon. Nevertheless, to avoid interference or harm our region, we forward with l. Again, the main point is that it has powers for what that realized. But the main issue is not the difference contents of the plan, but the procedure carried out. Dejde side to LACRALO leadership and all its members, which considered gravity.
2. CROPP Program
The Chair of Subcomitde Proyecciny participation and is also Chair the CROPP program after approving a strategic plan for our region without authority they now decided to implement the plan Strategic, and define who encargary who viajaren his implementacin. But this time also without authority, has Sern defined that members of Subcomitde Proyecciny Those who harn participation. This without any involvement or consultation with LACRALO. I must mention that there are SC members who long ago have not engaged in any activity in LACRALO (meetings monthly, ratings, webinars). This procedure is not established by the program to determine CROPP the trips. S, it required to be submitted the draft approved by consensus and raised by regional leaders for approval by the program CROPP. And this is what is not estcumpliendo. Spaces will be used LACRALO not approved for this procedure, and there we found out. And that I also think critically.
Regarding the trip Haity Dominican Republic, he was only cited for a difference of procedure that made the Chair of CROPP with another application was filed out of time and we solicital President and Secretary, and to keep that square, it approved, assuming the responsibility not to consult our Regin ..
For the record: about the trip he took the Lord Dev Anand Teelucksingh, in the same meeting that would travel Buenos definiquien Aires, the same authorization solicitla the President and Secretary LACRALO to travel to Buenos Aires, which although it was not the CROPP program hinted that from that moment it was. And the We authorize. This is contained in the records of that meeting.
Best regards
Alberto Soto
-----Original message----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On behalf of alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca Posted on: wednesday, February 17, 2016 21:51 To: lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
[[Translated text (in -> en) -]]
Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC From: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
Dear Alberto,
I will comment on the issues of commitment and divulgaciny CROPP issues separately. Although the two groups estn chaired by the same person, operating under different rules and processes.
Participation Proyecciny Subcomitde
The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members appointed by each RALO ms any others who chose to participate.Operationally, the SC does not distinguish between the two types of participants. Leadership SC It is selected by the SC in s. View (<
https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+an
d + Engagement> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+o n + + and + Engagement Outreach) for more details.
There are 14 members of LACRALO, more than any other region.
Any work product of the SC should be a product of all the SC, or at least those who choose to be active and should definitely participar.Que officers include members selected by the region. The SC can RALOS decide to ask for input, but even if it does not work, responsibility of regional members to ensure that the region is involved. In an environment of multiple stakeholders, each participant can not get exactly what you want, but each participant must have an opportunity to be heard. If a product of is working on a particular region (as it is for the CROPP strategies), which clearly has a very important role to region to play.For LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that SC Spanish interpretation to ensure that its members can participate equally.
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint within the SC people estn not being heard.
Independence RALOS, like most things in life is not absolute. In many cases, a ALAC SC or GT carried out the work on behalf of ALAC and In general. They do it with the participation of people of all General regiones.En these decisions or documents not affect what a RALO you can do, but sometimes gives the ALAC SC explicit responsibility to take action on behalf ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not return to the ALAC for ratification.
In the case of CROPP especfico strategy document, I'm not an expert, but I see a big difference between the resulting document and what I've heard is of interest to especfico LACRALO. The exact wording may be different, but the intention seems to be the same. But regardless of how I read, if the region has a problem, which should be treated within the SC, and for those LACRALO appointed to work on the SC. Shay It is a situation in which members and ComitDirectivo President and co-chairs can not solve a problem, I hope that leadership ALAC presentaramo Team, ensuring that the ALT members of the region is aware of problem.
You mention that the internal document LACRALO tena more concrete details.That is razonable.Como understand the situation, the GSE plans someterna not exigique level of detail and application. While the two were complementary and did not conflict, no ningn problem.
CROPP program
Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was conducted by the team of revision CROPP (RT) from the previous year. The stream consists of RT two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of Subcomitde Finance and Budget, and a member of the Scope and Participation SC.
A requests for use of funds ranging from CROPP initiator for RALO and then the CROPP RT. Exactly how sparse approved a project to RALO. I suspect that most RALOS do this with its leadership team and perhaps some others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by the RALO leadership the application is approved by the thinning, the CROPP RT should review. They have a duty to ensure that the application complies with the regional strategy and It is in every way a good peticin.Si not estn satisfied, they can reject the request or send it back to the originator or to RALO modification. My understanding is that the LACRALO Haity trip to the Dominican Republic It was satisfactory and I see no need for NEXT review the process this time.
For the record, Dev Anand did not Teelucksingh travel to Buenos Aires on CROPP funds. Your trip It was funded by GSE under a completely different program.
I hope this is addressed to all their problems.
Regards, Alan
TRADUCCIÓN POR SILVIA VIVANCO:
Estimado Alan, estoy obligado como Presidente de LACRALO Estar en contacto sobre este tema:
La insistencia del presidente de un Subcomité Del ALAC (Alcance y Participación SC) en Toma de decisiones, que deben, por reglamento será Hecho dentro de LACRALO y con pleno Participación de sus miembros ALSs, me obliga a hacerlo.
Comentarios de Pisanty y yo se han citado Como si fueran una aprobación del Plan Generado en la O / E Subcomité, que actuó Sin consultar previamente el documento que Ya habíamos preparado. Tanto la mía, y la Opinión de Alejandro Pisanty eran críticos de dicho documento. Posteriormente, ya pesar de la mala procedimiento, que, En la pantalla de la buena voluntad y la búsqueda de la paz en nuestra Región, aceptado este plan, a pesar del hecho Que la nuestra tenía detalles más concretos sobre la países, de acuerdo con la lista que rápidamente Presentada, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico.
El detalle principal era que el plan debe tener en cuenta de forma prioritaria, los países Que tuvo la tasa más baja de internet Penetración, como una manera para iniciar la requerida Mayor apoyo y las principales acciones de coordinación con ICANN GSE. Pedí aclaraciones del Presidente de El Subcomité de nuestra última reunión mensual.A Esa reunión, no sólo insistió en su Error, pero confirmó que las personas Formación de tales Subcomité estaría a cargo de La ejecución de dicho proyecto y que eran También el análisis de las alternativas de la CROPP Programa para su aplicación por parte de dicho Subcomité.
En resumen: en primer lugar una ALS presenta una Proyecto, que deberá ser aprobado por consenso Dentro de LACRALO y luego dirección del LACRALO Lo envía para su aprobación a través del programa CROPP y luego a GSE.
Ellos están asumiendo un poder que no lo hace Corresponderles, a pesar de que habíamos pedido por Correo electrónico y en la última reunión mensual que no lo hicieron.
También insistió en que el Subcomité Formado por miembros de LACRALO, erróneamente La comprensión de este tipo de acciones validadas.
El MOU que LACRALO ha firmado con la ICANN, Nos da la independencia en las decisiones, lo cual Debe tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra Región Y dentro de nuestra área de discusión normativa, no se Dentro de un Subcomité de ALAC, a pesar del hecho Que este se compone de miembros de LACRALO.
En los enlaces que aparecen en el correo electrónico a continuación, se Ver que un programa similar para AFRALO era Aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO de Septiembre 21, 2015; de APRALO por sus líderes el 3 de julio, 2015; de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh la 29 de de septiembre de 2015; y la LACRALO también por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. En Menos para LACRALO, que ha tomado un papel que no le corresponde.
En los correos electrónicos citados por el Presidente de la Subcomité, existen inconsistencias tales como El intercambio de correos electrónicos a la propuesta de Carlton Samuels para ir a Surinam; esto sólo fue Presentada por Dev Anand Teelucksingh en el Encuentro que tuvimos en el Haití y Dominicana República.Había tal urgencia que no lo hicimos Tener tiempo para enviarlo a LACRALO y Excepcionalmente decidimos con Humberto en Esa reunión a fin de evitar la pérdida de nuestra asignación de viaje
En la reunión previa a la última reunión de ICANN en Buenos Aires, se dice que estamos de acuerdo Y publicado los nombres de los que viajaría a dicha reunión.
CROPP? S Silla, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, Publicado tales nombres, pero omitidas en el Listar su propio nombre, porque viajó a Argentina con una asignación de viaje del programa de este tipo.
Para salvaguardar nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomía y La esperanza de evitar inconvenientes futuros, solicito Que se procede a emitir la Directiva correspondiente a dicho Subcomité.
Estimado Alan, me veo Obligado Como Presidente de LACRALO un Ponerme en Contacto por este tema.
La insistencia del Presidente de la ONU Subcomitde ALAC (Alcance y SC) en Tomar Decisiones Que por norma Deben tomarse en el interior de LACRALO y con participacin de Sus Miembros ALS, me obli un Ello. Las repetidas aclaraciones ninguna decisin ESA justifican.
Se ha Citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty ymos Como Si hubieran Sido Aprobacin del Plan de Generado en ESE subcomitsin Haber consultado Previamente el documento con El que ya contbamos. Tanto la opinin de Alejandro Como la ma, Eran crticas de tal documento. A posteriori y una ESE mal Procedimiento, Como la Muestra de Buena Voluntad y buscando la Nuestra Regin, dimos Como Aceptado DICHO plan, PESE una cola el nuestro Detalles ms Concretos Sobre los paSES, segn La Lista Que Yo oportunamente Presentara, los antes y Mucho of this Plan de Estratgico. El detalle era
Que se deba Tener en Cuenta de Como priority, un paSES Aquellos Que El menor ndice de penetracin de Internet, Como una forma de Comenzar por Los Que requeran alcalde Apoyo y mayores: acciones de una Coordinar con ICANN.
Pedaclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomiten Nuestra ltima reunin Mensual; allno en solitario insistien error Do, Sino Que las confirmque Personas Integrante de DICHO Subcomitse haran cargo de la IMPLEMENTACIÓN Plan de DICHO, y adems Estaban analizado las Alternativas del Programa CROPP para su IMPLEMENTACIÓN por parte de Subcomit DICHO. Como sntesis de Tema this en particular: Primero Una ALS Presenta Proyecto de las
Por consensus en LACRALO Y LUEGO EL Liderazgo de LACRALO lo ENVA párrafo Aprobacin al Programa CROPP y de alla GSE. Se estn arrogando Una Atribucin Que No corresponde, PESE un Que se pidipor electrónico y en la Reunin mensual Que No lo hicieran.
Tambin insistien Que DICHO subcomitestaba Conformado por Miembros de LACRALO, Entendiendo errneamente Que Ello convalidaba cuentos: acciones. El MOU Que Tiene LACRALO Firmado con la ICANN, nos da la Independencia en Decisiones, Las Que Deben tomarse DENTRO DEL à mbito de Nuestra Reginy Nuestro à mbito normativo de discusiones, y sin within ONU Subcomitde ALAC, PESE una cola estintegrado por Miembros de LACRALO.
En los une Que estn indicados en el correo electrónico de abajo, Se Puede Programa similares de AFRALO FUE Aprobado por los Miembros de AFRALO el Septiembre de 2015; El de APRALO Por Sus lderes el 3 de julio de 2015; EL De NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; El de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015; y el de LACRALO tambin por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por LACRALO,
Ha Tomado Una atribucin Que No le corresponde.
En los citados electrónico Por El Presidente Del subcomit, Cuentos Como el Intercambio de correos para la Propuesta de Carlton To go una Suriname; ESTO FUE solitario Presentado por Dev Anand Una reunin Que mantuvimos por el tema de Haity Repblica Dominica.Era Con tal urgencia Que No tuvimos Tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y Excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en ESA reunin para no perder Viaje de CROPP. En la reunin previa al ltimo reunión de la ICANN en Aires, se cita Que concordamos y were Publicados los Nombres de Quienes Viajaran una reunión DICHO. El Presidente del CROPP, Dev Anand Nombres publicdichos, Pero omitien La Lista el suyo propio, dado Que Viajcon Una vacante de DICHO Programa.
Por el resguardo de Nuestras Decisiones, Nuestra Autónoma, y Evitar Futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la directiva Correspondiente una ESE Subcomit.
Saludos cordiales
Alberto Soto
[[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/84c682a75f.html --]]
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
---------- Message transféré ---------- From: Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> To: <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Cc: "'LACRALO list'" <lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "'Karlene Francis'" <karlenef@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:47:49 -0300 Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
Dear, please, can you remove a mailing list to Karlene Francis [ mailto:karlenef@gmail.com <karlenef@gmail.com>]. The ALS is The University of West Indies .
Thanks!
Kind regards
Alberto
*De:* Karlene Francis [mailto:karlenef@gmail.com] *Enviado el:* lunes, 22 de febrero de 2016 22:27 *Para:* Alberto Soto *CC:* LACRALO list *Asunto:* Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
Dear Alberto,
I belong to UWI. Thanks in advance.
Sincerely, Karlene Francis
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <asoto@ibero-americano.org> Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC To: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC from: asoto@ibero-americano.org
In order to complete the order Karlene, you would be so kind as to tell me to ALS belong? Thank you. Alberto Soto
Sent from my ASUS
-------- Original message -------- From: karlenef@gmail.com Posted: Thu, February 18, 2016 8:37:55 -0300 To: lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
[[- Translated text (es -> en) -]]
Asunto: Re: Alcance y Compromiso SC De: karlenef@gmail.com
Estimado Alberto,
Es lamentable que todavía existen tan enorme nivel de desconfianza en
LACRALO. La situación es ahora insostenible. Por favor retire mi nombre de todas las listas de correo. No deseo ser un miembro de este grupo.
Saludos, karlene Francisco
On 17 Feb 2016, at 7:48 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>
wrote:
Dear Alberto,
I will comment on the issues of the Outreach and Engagement and CROPP issues separately. Despite the two groups being chaired by the same person, they operate under different rules and processes.
Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement
The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members named by each RALO plus any other people that chose to participate. Operationally, the SC does not distinguish between the two types of participants. The SC leadership is selected by the SC itself. See ( https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+an... ) for further details.
There are 14 members from LACRALO, more than from any other region.
Any work product of the SC should be a product of the entire SC, or at least those who choose to be active and participate. That certainly should include the official members selected by the region. The SC may decide to ask RALOs for input, but even if it doesn’t, it is the responsibility of the regional members to ensure that the region is involved. In a multistakeholder environment, every participant cannot get exactly what they want, but every participant should have an opportunity to be heard. If a work product is about a particular region (as it is for the CROPP strategies), that region clearly has a very important role to play. In the case of LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that the SC has Spanish interpretation to ensure that your members can participate equitably.
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint from within the SC that people are not being listened to.
The Independence of RALOs, like most things in life, is not absolute. In many cases, an ALAC SC or WG carries out work on behalf of ALAC and At-Large. They do this with the participation of people from all regions. Generally these decisions or documents do not impact what a RALO can do, but occasionally the ALAC gives a SC explicit responsibility to take action on behalf of ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not go back to the ALAC for ratification.
In the specific case of the CROPP strategy document, I am not an expert, but I do not see a wide difference between the resultant document and what I have heard is of specific interest to LACRALO. The exact words may be different, but the intent seems the same. But regardless of how I read it, IF the region has a problem, it should be dealt with within the SC and by those appointed by LACRALO to work on the SC. If there is a situation where the SC members and the Chair and Co-Chairs cannot resolve an issue, I expect it to be presented to me or the ALAC Leadership Team, ensuring that the ALT Member from the region is aware of the issue.
You mention that the internal LACRALO document had more concrete details. That is quite reasonable. As I understand the situation, the plans to be submitted to GSE did not require that level of detail and implementation. As long as the two were complementary and did not conflict, there is no problem.
CROPP Program
Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was carried out by the CROPP Review Team (RT) from the previous year. The current RT is composed of two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of the Finance and Budget Subcommittee, and one by the Members of the Outreach and Engagement SC.
A requests for use of CROPP funds goes from the originator to the RALO and then to the CROPP RT. Exactly how the RALO approves a project is up to the RALO. I suspect that most RALOs do this with their leadership team and perhaps a few others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by RALO leadership that a request is approved by the RALO, the CROPP RT must review it. They have the duty to ensure that the request meets the regional strategy and is in all ways a good request. If they are not satisfied, they can either reject the request or refer it back to the originator or RALO for modification. My understanding is that the LACRALO trip to Haiti and the Dominican Republic was satisfactory and I do not see the need to review the process it followed at this time.
For the record, Dev Anand Teelucksingh did not travel to Buenos Aires on CROPP funds. His trip was funded by GSE under a completely different program.
I hope that this addresses all of your issues.
Regards, Alan
TRANSLATION BY SILVIA VIVANCO:
Dear Alan, I am obliged as President of LACRALO to get in touch about this issue:
The insistence of the Chairman of a Subcommittee of the ALAC (Outreach and Engagement SC ) in making decisions which should, by regulation be made inside of LACRALO and with full participation of its members ALSs, compels me to do so. Repeated clarifications do not justify such a decision.
Comments from Pisanty and myself have been cited as if they were an approval of the Plan generated in the O/E Subcommittee, which acted without previously consulting the document which we already had prepared. Both mine, and the opinion of Alejandro Pisanty were critical of such document. Subsequently, and despite the bad procedure, we, in display of good will and seeking peace in our Region, accepted this plan, despite the fact that ours had more concrete details about the countries, according to the list that I promptly submitted, and long before this Strategic Plan.
The main detail was that the plan should take into account as a priority, those countries that had the lowest rate of Internet penetration, as a way to start that required greater support and major actions to coordinate with ICANN GSE. I asked for clarifications to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on our last monthly meeting. At that meeting, he not only insisted on his mistake, but he confirmed that the persons forming such Subcommittee would be in charge of the implementation of such plan and they were also analyzing the alternatives of the CROPP Program for its implementation by of such Subcommittee.
In summary: first an ALS presents a project, which shall be approved by consensus within LACRALO and then leadership of LACRALO sends it for approval through the CROPP program and then to GSE.
They are assuming a power which does not correspond to them, even though I requested by email and at the last monthly meeting that they did not.
He also insisted that the Sub-Committee was formed by members of LACRALO, erroneously understanding this validated such actions.
The MOU that LACRALO has signed with ICANN, gives us the independence in decisions, which should be taken within the scope of our Region and within our normative discussions area, not within a Sub-Committee of ALAC, despite the fact that this is composed of members of LACRALO.
In the links listed in the email below, you can see that a similar program for AFRALO was approved by the members of AFRALO on September 21, 2015; of APRALO by their leaders on July 3, 2015; of NARALO by Glenn McKnight 4l 4 August 2015; of EURALO by Dev Anand Teelucksingh the 29th September 2015; and the LACRALO also by Dev Anand Teelucksingh on September 15, 2015. At least for LACRALO, he has taken a role which does not correspond to him.
In the emails cited by the Chair of the Subcommittee, there are inconsistencies such as the exchange of emails for the proposal by Carlton Samuels to go to Surinam; this was only presented by Dev Anand Teelucksingh in the meeting which we had on the Haiti and Dominican Republic. There was such urgency that we did not have time to submit it to LACRALO and exceptionally we decided with Humberto at that meeting so as to avoid losing our CROPP trip allocation.
In the meeting previous to the last meeting of ICANN in Buenos Aires, it is said that we agreed and published the names of who would travel to such meeting.
CROPP?s Chair, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, published such names, but omitted in the list his own name, because he travelled to Argentina with a travel allocation of such program.
To safeguard our decisions, our autonomy and hoping to avoid future inconvenient, I request that you proceed to issue the appropriate Directive to such Subcommittee.
At 11/01/2016 07:16 AM, Alberto Soto wrote:
Estimado Alan, me veo obligado como Presidente de LACRALO a ponerme en contacto por este tema.
La insistencia del Presidente de un Subcomité de ALAC (Alcance y compromiso SC) en tomar decisiones que por norma deben tomarse en el interior de LACRALO y con participación de sus ALSs miembros, me obliga a ello. Las repetidas aclaraciones no justifican esa decisión.
Se ha citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty y mÃos como si hubieran sido de aprobación del Plan generado en ese subcomité sin haber consultado previamente el documento con el que ya contábamos. Tanto la opinión de Alejandro como la mÃa, eran crÃticas de tal documento. A posteriori y pese a ese mal procedimiento, como muestra de buena voluntad y buscando la paz en nuestra Región, dimos como aceptado dicho Plan, pese a que el nuestro tenÃa detalles más concretos sobre los paÃses, según la lista que yo oportunamente presentara, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico. El detalle principal era que se debÃa tener en cuenta como prioridad, a aquellos paÃses que tuvieran el menor Ãndice de penetración de Internet, como una forma de comenzar por los que requerÃan mayor apoyo y mayores acciones a coordinar con GSE de ICANN.
Pedà aclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomité en nuestra última reunión mensual; allà no solo insistió en su error, sino que confirmó que las personas integrante de dicho Subcomité se harÃan cargo de la implementación de dicho plan, y además estaban analizado las alternativas del programa CROPP para su implementación por parte de dicho Subcomité. Como sÃntesis de este tema en particular: primero una ALS presenta un proyecto, se aprueba por consenso en LACRALO y luego el liderazgo de LACRALO lo envÃa para su aprobación al programa CROPP y de allà a GSE. Se están arrogando una atribución que no corresponde, pese a que se pidió por mail y en la última reunión mensual que no lo hicieran.
También insistió en que dicho subcomité estaba conformado por miembros de LACRALO, entendiendo erróneamente que ello convalidaba tales acciones. El MOU que LACRALO tiene firmado con ICANN, nos da la independencia en las decisiones, las que deben tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra Región y en nuestro ámbito normativo de discusiones, y no dentro de un Subcomité de ALAC, pese a que esté integrado por miembros de LACRALO.
En los links que están indicados en el mail de abajo, se puede ver que el programa similar de AFRALO fue aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO el 21 de septiembre de 2015; el de APRALO por sus lÃderes el 3 de julio de 2015; el de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; el de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015; y el de LACRALO también por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por LACRALO, se ha tomado una atribución que no le corresponde.
En los mail citados por el Presidente del subcomité, hay inconsistencias tales como el intercambio de correos para la propuesta de Carlton Samuels para ir a Surinam; esto solo fue presentado por Dev Anand Teelucksingh en una reunión que mantuvimos por el tema de Haità y República Dominica. Era con tal urgencia que no tuvimos tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en esa reunión para no perder un viaje de CROPP. En la reunión previa al último meeting de ICANN en Buenos Aires, se cita que concordamos y fueron publicados los nombres de quienes viajarÃan a dicho meeting. El Presidente del CROPP, Dev Anand Teelucksingh publicó dichos nombres, pero omitió en la lista el suyo propio, dado que viajó con una vacante de dicho programa.
Por el resguardo de nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomÃa, y esperando evitar futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la directiva correspondiente a ese Subcomité.
Saludos cordiales
Alberto Soto
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
[[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/7a451a2de8.html --]]
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
Este correo electrónico se ha enviado desde un equipo libre de virus y protegido por Avast. www.avast.com <https://www.avast.com/sig-email>
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
Agree!! You want to send a copy via email ?? Kind regards Alberto Soto De: lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] En nombre de marcellus Jean Bernard Enviado el: jueves, 25 de febrero de 2016 18:50 Para: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] lac-discuss-en Digest, Vol 90, Issue 72 Hi Mr Alberto Soto, how are you? I want to work with you Haitian legislation in technological matters, knowing that a bill is filed to the Haitian parliament as being responsible for commite AtLarge Jean Bernard AHI ( Association Haitienne des Internautes) 2016-02-22 17:48 GMT-08:00 <lac-discuss-en-request@atlarge-lists.icann.org>: Send lac-discuss-en mailing list submissions to lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to lac-discuss-en-request@atlarge-lists.icann.org You can reach the person managing the list at lac-discuss-en-owner@atlarge-lists.icann.org When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of lac-discuss-en digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: Outreach and Engagement SC (Dev Anand Teelucksingh) 2. Re: Outreach and Engagement SC (Alberto Soto) ---------- Message transféré ---------- From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> To: LACRALO discussion list <lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 18:20:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC Alberto, you continue to misrepresent the situation, which is unfortunate. I have already posted information (http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/lac-discuss-en/2016-January/014205....) and again have the emails from you and Humberto on these matters and thus the evidence to contradict your statements. Unfortunately, the At-Large doesn't have much time to have calls with interpretation but I'll ask At-Large Staff if there are any opportunities for a conference call with interpretation on Thursday 25 February or Friday 26 February and if so, ask for a Doodle to be sent. This call would be with the LACRALO members of the Outreach and Engagement SC, yourself and LACRALO representatives and anyone else in LACRALO interested on identifying outreach events in LAC region, what would be possible CROPP proposals to send and the ongoing efforts to identify possible stakeholders in the LAC region and other next steps. Dev Anand On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:28 PM, <asoto@ibero-americano.org> wrote:
[[--Translated text (es -> en)--]]
Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC from: asoto@ibero-americano.org
Dear Alan, I know in detail all these rules, so realicmi order.
1. Participation Subcomitde Proyecciny
LACRALO was not consulted on the Strategic Plan for the Region. It was Chair approved by the SC, unlike other Ralos that could prepare and approve its own Strategic Plan, habindolo treaty internally. The Chair of the SC has no power to generally plan strategic without consultation, and allow the entire region to achieve a consensus thereon. Nevertheless, to avoid interference or harm our region, we forward with l. Again, the main point is that it has powers for what that realized. But the main issue is not the difference contents of the plan, but the procedure carried out. Dejde side to LACRALO leadership and all its members, which considered gravity.
2. CROPP Program
The Chair of Subcomitde Proyecciny participation and is also Chair the CROPP program after approving a strategic plan for our region without authority they now decided to implement the plan Strategic, and define who encargary who viajaren his implementacin. But this time also without authority, has Sern defined that members of Subcomitde Proyecciny Those who harn participation. This without any involvement or consultation with LACRALO. I must mention that there are SC members who long ago have not engaged in any activity in LACRALO (meetings monthly, ratings, webinars). This procedure is not established by the program to determine CROPP the trips. S, it required to be submitted the draft approved by consensus and raised by regional leaders for approval by the program CROPP. And this is what is not estcumpliendo. Spaces will be used LACRALO not approved for this procedure, and there we found out. And that I also think critically.
Regarding the trip Haity Dominican Republic, he was only cited for a difference of procedure that made the Chair of CROPP with another application was filed out of time and we solicital President and Secretary, and to keep that square, it approved, assuming the responsibility not to consult our Regin ..
For the record: about the trip he took the Lord Dev Anand Teelucksingh, in the same meeting that would travel Buenos definiquien Aires, the same authorization solicitla the President and Secretary LACRALO to travel to Buenos Aires, which although it was not the CROPP program hinted that from that moment it was. And the We authorize. This is contained in the records of that meeting.
Best regards
Alberto Soto
-----Original message----- From: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [Mailto: lac-discuss-es-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On behalf of alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca Posted on: wednesday, February 17, 2016 21:51 To: lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
[[Translated text (in -> en) -]]
Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC From: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
Dear Alberto,
I will comment on the issues of commitment and divulgaciny CROPP issues separately. Although the two groups estn chaired by the same person, operating under different rules and processes.
Participation Proyecciny Subcomitde
The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members appointed by each RALO ms any others who chose to participate.Operationally, the SC does not distinguish between the two types of participants. Leadership SC It is selected by the SC in s. View (< https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+an d + Engagement> https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+o n + + and + Engagement Outreach) for more details.
There are 14 members of LACRALO, more than any other region.
Any work product of the SC should be a product of all the SC, or at least those who choose to be active and should definitely participar.Que officers include members selected by the region. The SC can RALOS decide to ask for input, but even if it does not work, responsibility of regional members to ensure that the region is involved. In an environment of multiple stakeholders, each participant can not get exactly what you want, but each participant must have an opportunity to be heard. If a product of is working on a particular region (as it is for the CROPP strategies), which clearly has a very important role to region to play.For LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that SC Spanish interpretation to ensure that its members can participate equally.
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint within the SC people estn not being heard.
Independence RALOS, like most things in life is not absolute. In many cases, a ALAC SC or GT carried out the work on behalf of ALAC and In general. They do it with the participation of people of all General regiones.En these decisions or documents not affect what a RALO you can do, but sometimes gives the ALAC SC explicit responsibility to take action on behalf ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not return to the ALAC for ratification.
In the case of CROPP especfico strategy document, I'm not an expert, but I see a big difference between the resulting document and what I've heard is of interest to especfico LACRALO. The exact wording may be different, but the intention seems to be the same. But regardless of how I read, if the region has a problem, which should be treated within the SC, and for those LACRALO appointed to work on the SC. Shay It is a situation in which members and ComitDirectivo President and co-chairs can not solve a problem, I hope that leadership ALAC presentaramo Team, ensuring that the ALT members of the region is aware of problem.
You mention that the internal document LACRALO tena more concrete details.That is razonable.Como understand the situation, the GSE plans someterna not exigique level of detail and application. While the two were complementary and did not conflict, no ningn problem.
CROPP program
Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was conducted by the team of revision CROPP (RT) from the previous year. The stream consists of RT two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of Subcomitde Finance and Budget, and a member of the Scope and Participation SC.
A requests for use of funds ranging from CROPP initiator for RALO and then the CROPP RT. Exactly how sparse approved a project to RALO. I suspect that most RALOS do this with its leadership team and perhaps some others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by the RALO leadership the application is approved by the thinning, the CROPP RT should review. They have a duty to ensure that the application complies with the regional strategy and It is in every way a good peticin.Si not estn satisfied, they can reject the request or send it back to the originator or to RALO modification. My understanding is that the LACRALO Haity trip to the Dominican Republic It was satisfactory and I see no need for NEXT review the process this time.
For the record, Dev Anand did not Teelucksingh travel to Buenos Aires on CROPP funds. Your trip It was funded by GSE under a completely different program.
I hope this is addressed to all their problems.
Regards, Alan
TRADUCCIÓN POR SILVIA VIVANCO:
Estimado Alan, estoy obligado como Presidente de LACRALO Estar en contacto sobre este tema:
La insistencia del presidente de un Subcomité Del ALAC (Alcance y Participación SC) en Toma de decisiones, que deben, por reglamento será Hecho dentro de LACRALO y con pleno Participación de sus miembros ALSs, me obliga a hacerlo.
Comentarios de Pisanty y yo se han citado Como si fueran una aprobación del Plan Generado en la O / E Subcomité, que actuó Sin consultar previamente el documento que Ya habíamos preparado. Tanto la mía, y la Opinión de Alejandro Pisanty eran críticos de dicho documento. Posteriormente, ya pesar de la mala procedimiento, que, En la pantalla de la buena voluntad y la búsqueda de la paz en nuestra Región, aceptado este plan, a pesar del hecho Que la nuestra tenía detalles más concretos sobre la países, de acuerdo con la lista que rápidamente Presentada, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico.
El detalle principal era que el plan debe tener en cuenta de forma prioritaria, los países Que tuvo la tasa más baja de internet Penetración, como una manera para iniciar la requerida Mayor apoyo y las principales acciones de coordinación con ICANN GSE. Pedí aclaraciones del Presidente de El Subcomité de nuestra última reunión mensual.A Esa reunión, no sólo insistió en su Error, pero confirmó que las personas Formación de tales Subcomité estaría a cargo de La ejecución de dicho proyecto y que eran También el análisis de las alternativas de la CROPP Programa para su aplicación por parte de dicho Subcomité.
En resumen: en primer lugar una ALS presenta una Proyecto, que deberá ser aprobado por consenso Dentro de LACRALO y luego dirección del LACRALO Lo envía para su aprobación a través del programa CROPP y luego a GSE.
Ellos están asumiendo un poder que no lo hace Corresponderles, a pesar de que habíamos pedido por Correo electrónico y en la última reunión mensual que no lo hicieron.
También insistió en que el Subcomité Formado por miembros de LACRALO, erróneamente La comprensión de este tipo de acciones validadas.
El MOU que LACRALO ha firmado con la ICANN, Nos da la independencia en las decisiones, lo cual Debe tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra Región Y dentro de nuestra área de discusión normativa, no se Dentro de un Subcomité de ALAC, a pesar del hecho Que este se compone de miembros de LACRALO.
En los enlaces que aparecen en el correo electrónico a continuación, se Ver que un programa similar para AFRALO era Aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO de Septiembre 21, 2015; de APRALO por sus líderes el 3 de julio, 2015; de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh la 29 de de septiembre de 2015; y la LACRALO también por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. En Menos para LACRALO, que ha tomado un papel que no le corresponde.
En los correos electrónicos citados por el Presidente de la Subcomité, existen inconsistencias tales como El intercambio de correos electrónicos a la propuesta de Carlton Samuels para ir a Surinam; esto sólo fue Presentada por Dev Anand Teelucksingh en el Encuentro que tuvimos en el Haití y Dominicana República.Había tal urgencia que no lo hicimos Tener tiempo para enviarlo a LACRALO y Excepcionalmente decidimos con Humberto en Esa reunión a fin de evitar la pérdida de nuestra asignación de viaje
En la reunión previa a la última reunión de ICANN en Buenos Aires, se dice que estamos de acuerdo Y publicado los nombres de los que viajaría a dicha reunión.
CROPP? S Silla, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, Publicado tales nombres, pero omitidas en el Listar su propio nombre, porque viajó a Argentina con una asignación de viaje del programa de este tipo.
Para salvaguardar nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomía y La esperanza de evitar inconvenientes futuros, solicito Que se procede a emitir la Directiva correspondiente a dicho Subcomité.
Estimado Alan, me veo Obligado Como Presidente de LACRALO un Ponerme en Contacto por este tema.
La insistencia del Presidente de la ONU Subcomitde ALAC (Alcance y SC) en Tomar Decisiones Que por norma Deben tomarse en el interior de LACRALO y con participacin de Sus Miembros ALS, me obli un Ello. Las repetidas aclaraciones ninguna decisin ESA justifican.
Se ha Citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty ymos Como Si hubieran Sido Aprobacin del Plan de Generado en ESE subcomitsin Haber consultado Previamente el documento con El que ya contbamos. Tanto la opinin de Alejandro Como la ma, Eran crticas de tal documento. A posteriori y una ESE mal Procedimiento, Como la Muestra de Buena Voluntad y buscando la Nuestra Regin, dimos Como Aceptado DICHO plan, PESE una cola el nuestro Detalles ms Concretos Sobre los paSES, segn La Lista Que Yo oportunamente Presentara, los antes y Mucho of this Plan de Estratgico. El detalle era
Que se deba Tener en Cuenta de Como priority, un paSES Aquellos Que El menor ndice de penetracin de Internet, Como una forma de Comenzar por Los Que requeran alcalde Apoyo y mayores: acciones de una Coordinar con ICANN.
Pedaclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomiten Nuestra ltima reunin Mensual; allno en solitario insistien error Do, Sino Que las confirmque Personas Integrante de DICHO Subcomitse haran cargo de la IMPLEMENTACIÓN Plan de DICHO, y adems Estaban analizado las Alternativas del Programa CROPP para su IMPLEMENTACIÓN por parte de Subcomit DICHO. Como sntesis de Tema this en particular: Primero Una ALS Presenta Proyecto de las
Por consensus en LACRALO Y LUEGO EL Liderazgo de LACRALO lo ENVA párrafo Aprobacin al Programa CROPP y de alla GSE. Se estn arrogando Una Atribucin Que No corresponde, PESE un Que se pidipor electrónico y en la Reunin mensual Que No lo hicieran.
Tambin insistien Que DICHO subcomitestaba Conformado por Miembros de LACRALO, Entendiendo errneamente Que Ello convalidaba cuentos: acciones. El MOU Que Tiene LACRALO Firmado con la ICANN, nos da la Independencia en Decisiones, Las Que Deben tomarse DENTRO DEL à mbito de Nuestra Reginy Nuestro à mbito normativo de discusiones, y sin within ONU Subcomitde ALAC, PESE una cola estintegrado por Miembros de LACRALO.
En los une Que estn indicados en el correo electrónico de abajo, Se Puede Programa similares de AFRALO FUE Aprobado por los Miembros de AFRALO el Septiembre de 2015; El de APRALO Por Sus lderes el 3 de julio de 2015; EL De NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; El de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015; y el de LACRALO tambin por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por LACRALO,
Ha Tomado Una atribucin Que No le corresponde.
En los citados electrónico Por El Presidente Del subcomit, Cuentos Como el Intercambio de correos para la Propuesta de Carlton To go una Suriname; ESTO FUE solitario Presentado por Dev Anand Una reunin Que mantuvimos por el tema de Haity Repblica Dominica.Era Con tal urgencia Que No tuvimos Tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y Excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en ESA reunin para no perder Viaje de CROPP. En la reunin previa al ltimo reunión de la ICANN en Aires, se cita Que concordamos y were Publicados los Nombres de Quienes Viajaran una reunión DICHO. El Presidente del CROPP, Dev Anand Nombres publicdichos, Pero omitien La Lista el suyo propio, dado Que Viajcon Una vacante de DICHO Programa.
Por el resguardo de Nuestras Decisiones, Nuestra Autónoma, y Evitar Futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la directiva Correspondiente una ESE Subcomit.
Saludos cordiales
Alberto Soto
[[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/84c682a75f.html --]]
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
---------- Message transféré ---------- From: Alberto Soto <asoto@ibero-americano.org> To: <staff@atlarge.icann.org> Cc: "'LACRALO list'" <lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "'Karlene Francis'" <karlenef@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 22:47:49 -0300 Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC Dear, please, can you remove a mailing list to Karlene Francis [mailto:karlenef@gmail.com]. The ALS is The University of West Indies . Thanks! Kind regards Alberto De: Karlene Francis [mailto:karlenef@gmail.com] Enviado el: lunes, 22 de febrero de 2016 22:27 Para: Alberto Soto CC: LACRALO list Asunto: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC Dear Alberto, I belong to UWI. Thanks in advance. Sincerely, Karlene Francis ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: <asoto@ibero-americano.org> Date: Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 12:08 PM Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC To: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org [[--Translated text (es -> en)--]] Subject: Re: Outreach and Engagement SC from: asoto@ibero-americano.org In order to complete the order Karlene, you would be so kind as to tell me to ALS belong? Thank you. Alberto Soto Sent from my ASUS -------- Original message -------- From: karlenef@gmail.com Posted: Thu, February 18, 2016 8:37:55 -0300 To: lac-discuss-es@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org Subject: Re: [lac-discuss-en] Outreach and Engagement SC
[[- Translated text (es -> en) -]]
Asunto: Re: Alcance y Compromiso SC De: karlenef@gmail.com
Estimado Alberto,
Es lamentable que todavía existen tan enorme nivel de desconfianza en LACRALO. La situación es ahora insostenible. Por favor retire mi nombre de todas las listas de correo. No deseo ser un miembro de este grupo.
Saludos, karlene Francisco
On 17 Feb 2016, at 7:48 PM, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca> wrote:
Dear Alberto,
I will comment on the issues of the Outreach and Engagement and CROPP issues separately. Despite the two groups being chaired by the same person, they operate under different rules and processes.
Subcommittee on Outreach and Engagement
The Subcommittee (SC) is composed of two members named by each RALO plus any other people that chose to participate. Operationally, the SC does not distinguish between the two types of participants. The SC leadership is selected by the SC itself. See ( https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/ALAC+Subcommittee+on+Outreach+an... ) for further details.
There are 14 members from LACRALO, more than from any other region.
Any work product of the SC should be a product of the entire SC, or at least those who choose to be active and participate. That certainly should include the official members selected by the region. The SC may decide to ask RALOs for input, but even if it doesn’t, it is the responsibility of the regional members to ensure that the region is involved. In a multistakeholder environment, every participant cannot get exactly what they want, but every participant should have an opportunity to be heard. If a work product is about a particular region (as it is for the CROPP strategies), that region clearly has a very important role to play. In the case of LACRALO, we go to great efforts to ensure that the SC has Spanish interpretation to ensure that your members can participate equitably.
To the best of my knowledge, there has been no major complaint from within the SC that people are not being listened to.
The Independence of RALOs, like most things in life, is not absolute. In many cases, an ALAC SC or WG carries out work on behalf of ALAC and At-Large. They do this with the participation of people from all regions. Generally these decisions or documents do not impact what a RALO can do, but occasionally the ALAC gives a SC explicit responsibility to take action on behalf of ALAC and At-Large even if the results do not go back to the ALAC for ratification.
In the specific case of the CROPP strategy document, I am not an expert, but I do not see a wide difference between the resultant document and what I have heard is of specific interest to LACRALO. The exact words may be different, but the intent seems the same. But regardless of how I read it, IF the region has a problem, it should be dealt with within the SC and by those appointed by LACRALO to work on the SC. If there is a situation where the SC members and the Chair and Co-Chairs cannot resolve an issue, I expect it to be presented to me or the ALAC Leadership Team, ensuring that the ALT Member from the region is aware of the issue.
You mention that the internal LACRALO document had more concrete details. That is quite reasonable. As I understand the situation, the plans to be submitted to GSE did not require that level of detail and implementation. As long as the two were complementary and did not conflict, there is no problem.
CROPP Program
Last year, the CROPP program within At-Large was carried out by the CROPP Review Team (RT) from the previous year. The current RT is composed of two people from each region, one appointed by the Members of the Finance and Budget Subcommittee, and one by the Members of the Outreach and Engagement SC.
A requests for use of CROPP funds goes from the originator to the RALO and then to the CROPP RT. Exactly how the RALO approves a project is up to the RALO. I suspect that most RALOs do this with their leadership team and perhaps a few others. Once the CROPP RT is notified by RALO leadership that a request is approved by the RALO, the CROPP RT must review it. They have the duty to ensure that the request meets the regional strategy and is in all ways a good request. If they are not satisfied, they can either reject the request or refer it back to the originator or RALO for modification. My understanding is that the LACRALO trip to Haiti and the Dominican Republic was satisfactory and I do not see the need to review the process it followed at this time.
For the record, Dev Anand Teelucksingh did not travel to Buenos Aires on CROPP funds. His trip was funded by GSE under a completely different program.
I hope that this addresses all of your issues.
Regards, Alan
TRANSLATION BY SILVIA VIVANCO:
Dear Alan, I am obliged as President of LACRALO to get in touch about this issue:
The insistence of the Chairman of a Subcommittee of the ALAC (Outreach and Engagement SC ) in making decisions which should, by regulation be made inside of LACRALO and with full participation of its members ALSs, compels me to do so. Repeated clarifications do not justify such a decision.
Comments from Pisanty and myself have been cited as if they were an approval of the Plan generated in the O/E Subcommittee, which acted without previously consulting the document which we already had prepared. Both mine, and the opinion of Alejandro Pisanty were critical of such document. Subsequently, and despite the bad procedure, we, in display of good will and seeking peace in our Region, accepted this plan, despite the fact that ours had more concrete details about the countries, according to the list that I promptly submitted, and long before this Strategic Plan.
The main detail was that the plan should take into account as a priority, those countries that had the lowest rate of Internet penetration, as a way to start that required greater support and major actions to coordinate with ICANN GSE. I asked for clarifications to the Chairman of the Subcommittee on our last monthly meeting. At that meeting, he not only insisted on his mistake, but he confirmed that the persons forming such Subcommittee would be in charge of the implementation of such plan and they were also analyzing the alternatives of the CROPP Program for its implementation by of such Subcommittee.
In summary: first an ALS presents a project, which shall be approved by consensus within LACRALO and then leadership of LACRALO sends it for approval through the CROPP program and then to GSE.
They are assuming a power which does not correspond to them, even though I requested by email and at the last monthly meeting that they did not.
He also insisted that the Sub-Committee was formed by members of LACRALO, erroneously understanding this validated such actions.
The MOU that LACRALO has signed with ICANN, gives us the independence in decisions, which should be taken within the scope of our Region and within our normative discussions area, not within a Sub-Committee of ALAC, despite the fact that this is composed of members of LACRALO.
In the links listed in the email below, you can see that a similar program for AFRALO was approved by the members of AFRALO on September 21, 2015; of APRALO by their leaders on July 3, 2015; of NARALO by Glenn McKnight 4l 4 August 2015; of EURALO by Dev Anand Teelucksingh the 29th September 2015; and the LACRALO also by Dev Anand Teelucksingh on September 15, 2015. At least for LACRALO, he has taken a role which does not correspond to him.
In the emails cited by the Chair of the Subcommittee, there are inconsistencies such as the exchange of emails for the proposal by Carlton Samuels to go to Surinam; this was only presented by Dev Anand Teelucksingh in the meeting which we had on the Haiti and Dominican Republic. There was such urgency that we did not have time to submit it to LACRALO and exceptionally we decided with Humberto at that meeting so as to avoid losing our CROPP trip allocation.
In the meeting previous to the last meeting of ICANN in Buenos Aires, it is said that we agreed and published the names of who would travel to such meeting.
CROPP?s Chair, Dev Anand Teelucksingh, published such names, but omitted in the list his own name, because he travelled to Argentina with a travel allocation of such program.
To safeguard our decisions, our autonomy and hoping to avoid future inconvenient, I request that you proceed to issue the appropriate Directive to such Subcommittee.
At 11/01/2016 07:16 AM, Alberto Soto wrote:
Estimado Alan, me veo obligado como Presidente de LACRALO a ponerme en contacto por este tema.
La insistencia del Presidente de un Subcomité de ALAC (Alcance y compromiso SC) en tomar decisiones que por norma deben tomarse en el interior de LACRALO y con participación de sus ALSs miembros, me obliga a ello. Las repetidas aclaraciones no justifican esa decisión.
Se ha citado comentarios de Alejando Pisanty y mÃos como si hubieran sido de aprobación del Plan generado en ese subcomité sin haber consultado previamente el documento con el que ya contábamos. Tanto la opinión de Alejandro como la mÃa, eran crÃticas de tal documento. A posteriori y pese a ese mal procedimiento, como muestra de buena voluntad y buscando la paz en nuestra Región, dimos como aceptado dicho Plan, pese a que el nuestro tenÃa detalles más concretos sobre los paÃses, según la lista que yo oportunamente presentara, y mucho antes de este Plan Estratégico. El detalle principal era que se debÃa tener en cuenta como prioridad, a aquellos paÃses que tuvieran el menor Ãndice de penetración de Internet, como una forma de comenzar por los que requerÃan mayor apoyo y mayores acciones a coordinar con GSE de ICANN.
Pedà aclaraciones al Presidente del Subcomité en nuestra última reunión mensual; allà no solo insistió en su error, sino que confirmó que las personas integrante de dicho Subcomité se harÃan cargo de la implementación de dicho plan, y además estaban analizado las alternativas del programa CROPP para su implementación por parte de dicho Subcomité. Como sÃntesis de este tema en particular: primero una ALS presenta un proyecto, se aprueba por consenso en LACRALO y luego el liderazgo de LACRALO lo envÃa para su aprobación al programa CROPP y de allà a GSE. Se están arrogando una atribución que no corresponde, pese a que se pidió por mail y en la última reunión mensual que no lo hicieran.
También insistió en que dicho subcomité estaba conformado por miembros de LACRALO, entendiendo erróneamente que ello convalidaba tales acciones. El MOU que LACRALO tiene firmado con ICANN, nos da la independencia en las decisiones, las que deben tomarse dentro del ámbito de nuestra Región y en nuestro ámbito normativo de discusiones, y no dentro de un Subcomité de ALAC, pese a que esté integrado por miembros de LACRALO.
En los links que están indicados en el mail de abajo, se puede ver que el programa similar de AFRALO fue aprobado por los miembros de AFRALO el 21 de septiembre de 2015; el de APRALO por sus lÃderes el 3 de julio de 2015; el de NARALO por Glenn McKnight 4l 4 de agosto de 2015; el de EURALO por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 29de septiembre de 2015; y el de LACRALO también por Dev Anand Teelucksingh el 15 de septiembre de 2015. Al menos por LACRALO, se ha tomado una atribución que no le corresponde.
En los mail citados por el Presidente del subcomité, hay inconsistencias tales como el intercambio de correos para la propuesta de Carlton Samuels para ir a Surinam; esto solo fue presentado por Dev Anand Teelucksingh en una reunión que mantuvimos por el tema de Haità y República Dominica. Era con tal urgencia que no tuvimos tiempo de presentarlo ante LACRALO y excepcionalmente lo definimos con Humberto en esa reunión para no perder un viaje de CROPP. En la reunión previa al último meeting de ICANN en Buenos Aires, se cita que concordamos y fueron publicados los nombres de quienes viajarÃan a dicho meeting. El Presidente del CROPP, Dev Anand Teelucksingh publicó dichos nombres, pero omitió en la lista el suyo propio, dado que viajó con una vacante de dicho programa.
Por el resguardo de nuestras decisiones, nuestra autonomÃa, y esperando evitar futuros inconvenientes, solicito tengas a bien dar la directiva correspondiente a ese Subcomité.
Saludos cordiales
Alberto Soto
_______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en
[[--Original text (es) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/7a451a2de8.html --]] _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en Este correo electrónico se ha enviado desde un equipo libre de virus y protegido por Avast. <https://www.avast.com/sig-email> www.avast.com _______________________________________________ lac-discuss-en mailing list lac-discuss-en@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/lac-discuss-en --- El software de antivirus Avast ha analizado este correo electrónico en busca de virus. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
participants (2)
-
Alberto Soto -
marcellus Jean Bernard