[[--Translated text (en -> es)--]] Asunto: Re: Una alternativa al modelo EMM propuesto en la Revista At-Large De: devtee@gmail.com Gracias Alejandro por los comentarios. La comunidad de alcance es ya una forma de modelo de membresía. En la ICANN en los estatutos https://www.icann.org/resources/pages/governance/bylaws-en bajo la Sección 12.2 (d) (ix) es "miembro de la comunidad At-Large" Un capítulo de At-Large simplemente traer personas de organizaciones en una país juntos para servir a un propósito unificado - al igual que cómo una Grupo de partes interesadas múltiples partes (MAG) se reune para organizar una IGF nacional. No se trata de la creación de nuevas organizaciones en aras de la la creación de organizaciones. En cuanto a la ISOC tener varios capítulos en un país, si hay una gran un número suficiente de personas se inscribió y participar en At-Large en nombre de los intereses de los usuarios finales de Internet dentro de un país, entonces tal vez varios capítulos de At-Large en un país podrían ser considerados.Sospecho potenciales capítulos de ISOC en un país tenían que demostrar que tenían suficientes números para justificar la creación de otro capítulo de ISOC cuando ya era una capítulo en el país. dev Anand El Lun 6 Feb, 2017 a 11:35, el Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Baruch < apisan@unam.mx> escribió:
Dev,
the proposed model of "ICANN At-Large Chapters" in each country is a step towards a membership-based ICANN, which is a no-go.
It is a top-down model that creates new organizations instead of bringing together existing organizations. This is troublesome in itself and also negates the "Web of Trust" model which lies at the foundation of At-Large representation. I consider that this model is still important and that the "At-Large Chapters" model is not an improvement.
I understand from your note that each country would have a single Chapter. Is that correct?
Again that is not what the Rotary or ISOC do. While ISOC prefers a single chapter per country, large, diverse countries like India or Canada have more than one. And certainly Rotary have numerous clubs, sometimes even more than one in a single city.
Yours,
Alejandro Pisanty
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dr. Alejandro Pisanty Facultad de QuÃmica UNAM Av. Universidad 3000, 04510 Mexico DF Mexico
+52-1-5541444475 <+52%201%2055%204144%204475> FROM ABROAD
+525541444475 <+52%2055%204144%204475> DESDE MÃXICO SMS +525541444475 <+52%2055%204144%204475> Blog: http://pisanty.blogspot.com LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/pisanty Unete al grupo UNAM en LinkedIn, http://www.linkedin.com/e/gis/ 22285/4A106C0C8614 Twitter: http://twitter.com/apisanty ---->> Unete a ISOC Mexico, http://www.isoc.org . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ------------------------------ *Desde:* lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [ lac-discuss-en-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] en nombre de Dev Anand Teelucksingh [devtee@gmail.com] *Enviado el:* lunes, 06 de febrero de 2017 06:26 *Hasta:* LACRALO discussion list *Asunto:* [lac-discuss-en] An Alternative to the EMM model proposed in the At-Large Review
I sent this in December last year to the LACRALO members of the At-Large Review Party. It outlines an alternative to the proposed EMM model in the At-Large Review.
Dev Anand
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Dev Anand Teelucksingh <devtee@gmail.com> Date: Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 5:19 PM Subject: Response to the draft At-Large Review document - please consider and forward to the ITEMS or discuss in the At-Large review call To: Fatima Cambronero <fatimacambronero@gmail.com>, Alberto Soto < asoto@ibero-americano.org>, Aida Noblia <aidanoblia@gmail.com>, Carlton Samuels <carlton.samuels@gmail.com>, Vanda UOL <vanda@uol.com.br>, Holly Raiche <h.raiche@internode.on.net>
Dear All,
Since time is short, I want to focus on the proposed EMM in the draft At-Large Review.
My thoughts - The proposed EMM has flaws. Some immediate ones : - it destroys the community and with that, the consensus building of community with replacement of individuals with even less ties to the public community. Such individuals will promote and collude with other individuals to keep themselves in the loop. Also, with many of the policy discussions in GNSO being English, this permanently eliminates persons from developing/emerging economies from non-English from ever participating. - given that any individual could already participate in GNSO, we would be no different from such random individuals - it removes the mandate on oversight and accountability on ICANN activities from end user interests - a thousand individuals in one large country will override 10 individuals from a small country so there will be less diversity in the EMM model only from those countries with large number of individuals. - Nomcom appointees to ALAC new to ICANN will serve as Liasions to other groups is not sensible
There are many more problems but I want to focus on a IMO a better At-Large model than the EMM one:
- ICANN establishes At-Large Chapters in each country similiar in concept to Rotary or ISOC chapters. - each chapter is open to anyone interested in ICANN from the interests of end users. - ICANN can set guidelines for each chapter - some examples: must do certain level of outreach, have term limits, have a public F2F awareness meeting to recruit new persons. ICANN would need to provide some funding to make this happen but this would be small and the chapters can account to ICANN for expenses. - ICANN can provide the tools (mailing lists, conference tools) to facilitate online discussions. - Because there is a consistent brand - At-Large Chapter in the country, marketing/promoting is greatly simplified and easier to explain. - Given that such chapters are virtual, it makes chapters easy to establish with only a few individuals from a country without the challenges of having formal organisations with bylaws and pay taxes.
So an At-Large chapter ends up being a virtual ALS in each country in the ALAC/RALO/ALS model.
The RALOs will consist of the chapters from each country in the region with each chapter electing two persons to coordinate the RALO work. The RALO will be better positioned to better fulfil its MOUs with ICANN and the RALO and ALAC would not have to bother with analysing whether an organisation meets the criteria of an ALS.
The At-Large chapters will be better able to network with At-Large chapters in other countries and build consensus on policy issues and help promote and grow the At-Large Community.
Dev Anand
[[--Original text (en) http://mm.icann.org/transbot_archive/81b276a6d2.html --]]