Robert, Pardon me for asking, but why is ongoing "outreach" on DNS policy issues important to you? Why is there a particular need to bring more and more souls into the process? When I consider, for example, the world of telephony policy I see that hardly anyone cares -- precisely because telephones work. They work just fine, so almost no one has an interest in engaging in "outreach" to bring the masses into discussions regarding policy for the telephone system. You have noted in an earlier submission to the CPSR Governance list a blog entry posted by Veni pointing to the "New Class: Civil Society Professionals". As time goes by, we should be expecting to see less and less public participation in DNS policy matters because most of the problems will have been fixed; instead we will likely see the continued involvement of a very very small group of CS professionals just as we see such within the telephony world (an example being Harold Feld's Media Access Project, or Susan Crawford as an expert on FCC matters). If the public needs to intereact with ICANN, they know where to find the front door. They certainly found the door and nailed their compliants onto it during the RegisterFly fiasco. There was no shortage of public involvement. There was only a shortage of ALAC involvement. Why then at this time do we need to spend money on "outreach" in North America when most North Americans know how to complain, and know where to send their complaints? Outreach has some value, but at this point in time I, for one, don't understand why it would be a "priority concern". Regards, Danny --- On Fri, 5/30/08, Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> wrote:
From: Robert Guerra <lists@privaterra.info> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: TR : Improvement of the win-win relationship between the Staff and the At-Large Community To: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Friday, May 30, 2008, 11:59 AM I welcome Frederic's efforts, and will submit comments ASAP. However, timing is not unexpected - as constructive changes @ at-large could have taken place long ago, but seem to take place just when the ALAC review is taking place.
I am still concerned with the lack of outreach. If there's one "meta comment" i can make at this moment - is that if indeed ALAC and at- large is supposed to represent users "everywhere" then we really need to get far more people - to know about ICANN, its complex technical and policy issues and find ways to constructively engage on mission specific items.
Over the last year, if i'm not mistaken we've had just - 1 - new group join NARALO. Obviously more would be better. Ideas on how to best grow - would be most welcome.
regards
Robert
On 30-May-08, at 11:42 AM, Brendler, Beau wrote:
Fantastic.
Per Darlene's note, I didn't know Frederic was sending this throughout the at-large. Good that he is.
I'll make sure my answers are representative of what is said on NA-discuss.
BB
-----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 11:15 AM To: NA Discuss; Brendler, Beau Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: TR : Improvement of the win-win relationship between the Staff and the At-Large Community
1. What issues are most important to your RALO and your region?
The North American community detailed its concerns in full measure during the JPA mid-term review cycle. I would advise ICANN Staff to review the submissions tendered to the NTIA.
2. How can we help make your time efficient?
A calendar detailing obligations, deadlines, responsible parties and process requirements would help. For example, in order for the Summit to be approved by the Board, a thoroughly comprehensive submission must be ready by 10 June. At this point in time we are still unaware as to whether the earlier set of questions tendered by Staff have been answered, whether there will be a Call for Workshop Proposals/Papers etc., -- you will note that the IGF has already received 104 workshop proposals for their upcoming endeavor -- whether whatever submission is produced needs to first be ratified by the ALAC in Special Session, etc.
3. What challenges and opportunities do you see for your region?
No comment.
4. How could we increase interaction between communities?
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink -- increased interaction may not be possible.
5. What are the top three priorities you would list for your regions?
A. At-Large representation on the ICANN Board B. Registrants constituency within the GNSO C. Appropriate measures to strengthen ICANN's Compliance Department
6. What are the top three objectives you would like to see achieved for your regions?
No comment.
7. What are the top three activities you would like to see implemented and practiced in your region?
No comment.
*** Scanned
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------