Hi Robert Excellent point. ALAC is working on criteria for evaluation of ALS applications, we can put in John's re-certification idea and I'll suggest a periodic review of all ALS activity in all regions. It would also be really good to maybe have the RALOs that are more advanced in some issues assist in capacity building for other regions that may need it. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Mr. Robert Guerra [mailto:lists@privaterra.info] Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 12:01 PM To: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Action Items Instead of leaving it to the sole discretion of the chair, i would prefer instead to determine participation related to a set of agreed indicators. it is much more objective. A set of possible markers to measure have already been mentioned. Personally, my view is that participation in meetings, online fora (such as this one), outreach, and more importantly - input into ICANN issues and processes would indicate that a group, or individual user is indeed active. A periodical report on "activities" should be made available, not only for those in the NA region - but for ALL the ALS. That way, one could clearly identify regions that are active, and regions where capacity development and further outreach might be useful. regards, Robert --- Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org> Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377 On 16-Apr-07, at 11:33 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Luc Faubert wrote:
"The Chair could be responsible to determine which ALSes made contributions that are "worthwhile".
Absolutely opposed, to anything requiring a judgement call.
I am accountable to my group's membership for the quality of our participation -- not to ICANN, and certainly not to this sub-group that -- so far -- can't demonstrate competence at even determining a meeting site (a month before the meeting is supposed to take place!).
Am I the only one to see the irony of a group whose participants complain about the arbitrariness of ICANN staff power, yet have no problem assigning similarly arbitrary authority to the group itself? Two wrongs do NOT make a right.
Quanitify what you consider "worthwhile" or leave such a provision out. If you can't quanitify it, I can't trust it.
- Evan
_______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- lists.icann.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
_______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica nn.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.4.0/762 - Release Date: 4/15/2007 4:22 PM -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 269.4.0/762 - Release Date: 4/15/2007 4:22 PM