It takes a lot of effort to make things easy for people to participate well. I consider myself to be one of the people who has taken my ball and gone home due to the culture around ICANN. Poor process= poor outcomes and unhappy people. Poor process makes good people act foolishly. I walked away from San Juan with a very favorable view of most people that I met, but a very unfavorable view of the scene. One argument that I would give for at-large as a separate entity from an NGO centered body is the fact that there is a big cultural divide between the way mom and pop groups build consensus and the way NGOs do. I believe that culture-clash is part of what we are witnessing in at-large. At-large is a kind of ad-hoc group trying to interact within the "big NGO" culture of ICANN. In order to fix the troubles of at-large -- and perhaps more generally ICANN itself-- it will take a lot more than a chat with the ombudsmen. Within the networks that I work most closely with- open source, appropriate technology, community media, local broadband projects-- there is an awareness that you need to have "process artists" in the fold of any functioning group in order to make it cohere well enough to get stuff done. *AND* unless its a very small affinity group -- there *MUST* be more than one involved. You need a critical mass of people who can corral people back to the agreed upon topic, the agreed upon process for getting things done, and so forth. For groups as large and international as the ones that meet around ICANN there is the additional challenge that there are very distinctly different ways of approaching the work that we each bring with us. Therefore the people who are shepherds of the process need to be highly skilled. They need have more than one or two tricks up their sleeves because they won't make friends by saying, "This is what we do in XYZ place and it always works for us." While I can appreciate the sentiment of the PDF that Jaqueline sent around, I think it is too general to be of use on its own. There are some nice principles in it, but to actually get stuff done principles need to be spelled out into clear modes of action. Recently, Gareth Shearman of Telecommunities Canada and I went to an ARIN (American Registry of Internet Numbers) meeting. It was both amusing and refreshing to watch the cartoon at the Newcomers meeting that modeled exactly how to speak at the open mic. It was both ridiculous and a very useful tool to get up to speed on how to fully participate in the odd little world that is ARIN. The cartoon leaves nothing to the imagination in terms of process. I would say a good 2/3 of the ARIN community are "process artists" and they do seem to be able to move through a lot of dense techno-political material in an amazingly efficient way with lots of input from those present. *And* the process is dynamic with suggestions from the community constantly refining the process. "Making friends" is also a critical part of volunteer, ad-hoc groups. It should be fostered as it leads to better outcomes, higher levels of participation, longer cycles of involvement and so forth. Time honored traditions such as breaking bread are small investments in the long run. Time for reflection and interaction among peers are critical to plan into the work cycle. As far as I'm concerned, the ancillary benefit of being able to rub elbows with others who care about the social impact of networks outweighs the benefit of participating in ICANN per se. Therefore, if there is value to recruiting "people like me" into the ICANN process, the structure leaves little incentive for me to be involved because 1) the structure doesn't allow much lateral interaction 2) I'm not learning much about how ICANN policies affect the issues I care about 3) It's not fun to participate. In short, there is no payoff. Those of you whom I spoke with in San Juan have heard me say this, but I believe that it would be worthwhile to hire a trained facilitator for the meetings and, for that matter, for the email lists. Someone who has experience working within ad hoc structures. At-Large has so much potential, and yet... -Dharma Dailey Emerging Futures Network On 29-Oct-07, at 9:21 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
To repeat
I did not refer anything to the Ombudsman, as ALAC Chair or as a private individual. However, if I were to do so as an individual, that would be confidential and I wouldn’t have to discuss with anyone. As Chair, I continue on the path of asking for respectful communication that has been ongoing for months. He’s one of the sources that I have checked as experts in the matter and he sent me info that I passed on. Other experts have provided input into the emails I have sent in the past, have provided other background information, etc. The Ombudsman is an ICANN resource, not only a tribunal.
And others have indicated to me that they have approached the Ombudsman. I don’t expect that they will post to this list, as part of the problem is that they feel oppressed and unable to participate.
You are perfectly within your rights to disagree with anything and everything on all lists. Just please do it without personal attacks, disrespect, threatening language, insults etc. As I have been asking for a while, as is in the NARALO code of conduct, as in the ALAC Rules. I haven’t indicated in any emails in public any persons from any region as being culpable. So this isn’t an anti-NA thing. There is no attempt to muzzle anyone from expressing their opinion in a respectful and polite manner. There however is an ongoing attempt to make these lists comfortable for everyone, from all regions, to express their opinions, to not be afraid to say what they think. I would hope that as great advocates of free speech, NA in particular would support actions taken to ensure the rights of all to participate freely.
And before anyone takes this as proof that I think that this email is any of those things, I am saying this in a general way.
Jacqueline
From: Thompson, Darlene [mailto:DThompson@GOV.NU.CA] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:45 To: jam@jacquelinemorris.com; Robert Guerra; NA Discuss Subject: RE: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful communication
Jacqueline,
It is still true that you did not get full support from ALAC to go to the Ombudsman.
Cultural sensitivity goes both ways. I worded my e-mails as politely as possible but I sitll had to disagree with what was happening. I am really tired of people complaining about the lack of sensitivity from NA people. If it there were actually any insults or threats then you would be fully justified in doing what you did just as an individual. As ALAC Chair, you did not - not without a quorum from the ALAC - unless you made it clear that you were doing so as an individual. Using your power to stifle contrary view is not appropriate and I refuse to back down from this point.
Therefore, what Robert says, still goes. I support him 100%.
Darlene
_____
From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Mon 10/29/2007 8:33 PM To: 'Robert Guerra'; 'NA Discuss' Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Informationonrespectful communication
Robert
Not at all.
And I told you that in my reply to your private email to me.
Mis-representing what I said is not kosher at all.
I sent some info that was sent to me by Frank after a discussion with several people about how to improve the respect in online communication. He is the ICANN expert in this. This is a follow up to the emails I have sent previously on list communication.
With regard to who has contacted the Ombudsman to date about emails sent to the public list (NOT the NARALO list) - I cannot say, as Ombudsman referrals are confidential and he hasn’t told me anything about that. Others have however indicated to me that they have considered approaching or have approached him about some emails on the public list. I haven’t been informed by anyone about complaints to him on any communication on the NARALO list to date.
That is the correct information, and I hope that you will correct any emails that you have sent out with the erroneous information .
Jacquelin
From: Robert Guerra [mailto:lists@privaterra.info] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 17:03 To: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful communication
As some of you might have seen. it seem that Jacqueline thinks that comments from myself and others on NA RALO are soo inappropiate that it requires a referral to the ombudsman for his comment.
Frankly, i'm amazed and shocked. I ask that if you feel strongly on this that you comment - ASAP.
thanks
Robert
--
Begin forwarded message:
From: Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK "mailto:lists@privaterra.info"lists@privaterra.info>
Date: October 29, 2007 4:59:08 PM PDT
To: At-Large Global List <HYPERLINK "mailto:alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org"alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Subject: Re: [At-Large] FW: Information onrespectful communication
Jacqueline:
Huh !
Either don't understand your email, or am so surprised that as outgoing chair you would take such an action. To be hones, after a productive and team building day yesterday - you take this bombshell and drop this on us. i'm frankly shocked ...
I am assuming correctly that differences of opinion are such that you - in your own personal capacity - are asking the ombudsman to pass a judgement on individuals in at-large that are exercising their freedom of speech?
An action such as a referral should be done in consultation with the ALAC, and not done on your whim. Please seek the support of your peers, to take such drastic steps.
Might I suggest that - instead - you seek the input of the alac, and see if indeed we concur with your course of action. If obtain support, fine. If not, then no course of action - should be obtain.
In summary - I think I speak for many of those on the ALAC in saying, please seeking clarify your proposed actions. Personally, I think they are most inappropriate.
regards,
Robert
---
Robert Guerra <HYPERLINK "mailto:rguerra@privaterra.ca"rguerra@privaterra.ca>
Managing Director, Privaterra
Tel +1 416 893 0377
On 29-Oct-07, at 4:01 PM, Jacqueline A. Morris wrote:
0" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear all
As so many of the postings to this list are so disrespectful I have asked the Ombudsman for his input informally, before he gets brought into it formally by people who this has affected negatively. He has offered the following. Please read and attempt to follow some of the suggestions in the documents he has sent, so we can all work productively.
Jacqueline
From: frank.fowlie [HYPERLINK "mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org"mailto:frank.fowlie@icann.org] Sent: Monday, October 29, 2007 15:51 To: jacqueline Morris Subject:
wellington comment from page 6 on
and
HYPERLINK "http://www.icann.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf"http:// www.ican n.org/ombudsman/respectful-communication.pdf
Frank Fowlie, MACAM Ombudsman
The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) 4676 Admiralty Way, Suite 330 Marina del Rey California, USA, 90292
tel: +310-823-9358 fax: +310-823-8649
HYPERLINK "http://www.icannombudsman.org/"www.icannombudsman.org
The Values of this Office are: -Respect for Diversity; -Excellence in Ombudsmanship; -Professionalism; -Confidentiality; -Impartiality; -and Independence.
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02
No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.12/1096 - Release Date: 10/27/2007 11:02
<winmail.dat> ------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge- lists.icann.org Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ ------