>whew< Makes MUCH more sense to me…
Darlene A. Thompson
Community Access Program Administrator
Nunavut Department of Education/N-CAP
c/o P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0
Phone: (867) 975-6531
Fax: (867) 979-8870
dthompson@gov.nu.ca
From:
na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org]
On Behalf Of Mr. Robert Guerra
Sent: Monday, May 28, 2007 12:37
PM
To: NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Staff
Review of Draft MoU Terms
Jean:
using parliamentary analogies might make things too complex. a few comments:
* The reference to "senate" in Canada has a different connotation, as that body here is appointed and not elected by the public. So for me, a senate would not be the most representative..
* A question .. Would the "senate" be able to act alone - or as is the case normally, require that all actions and initiatives also be endorsed by the other chamber (the house) before the are approved. With this approach, there could be stalemates is often happens (both in Canada, US, and elsewhere).
Let me suggest a slight variant that, i hope could be adopted...
NA "unaffiliated" users be created as a "virtual" umbrella organization , one that has ALS status as well as a set of chairs that oversee admin and other requests. There would be two chairs, who would be elected by the NA "unaffiliated" to sit in the NA regional assembly.
- Individual who is interested in joining NA at large would have thus two options:
- (1) Can join an organization that has been ALS certified. The organization in question has their own procedures as to how to join, etc..
- (2) instead of joining an affiliated organization, and individual can contact the NA "unaffiliated" ALS.
At this point , there are two options:
1. Have a set of criteria on who can/can not joing the virtual group. If criteria exist:
- Application (that would have to be drafted) would be reviewed by NA "unaffiliated" ALS chairs (s), who would process and/or approve the application request.
If approved the regional RALO, ALAC and ICANN staff would be notified that individual is now a full member of the NA "unaffiliated" ALS
The ALS chairs and the virtual NA "unaffiliated" group would of course be able to change and/or revise their working methods as they see fit. What I am suggesting is a possible first version - that would be subject to review in a year.
With criteria, the virtual group would be less vulnerable to capture by interested parties
2. Establish no criteria, let anyone join.
- Anyone could join the virtual group.
- the group would run the risk of being capture by interested parties
having been involved in international processes with non profits (ie. civil society), I would much prefer option 1. Though it creates a bit of structure, it is light and would make it harder for the group to be captured.
those are my comments.
regards,
Robert
---
Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org>
Managing Director, Privaterra
Tel +1 416 893 0377
On 28-May-07, at 10:50 AM, Jean Armour Polly wrote:
Hi, I don't want to speak for Wendy but as I recall that is exactly why she was proposing a bicameral idea, where the accredited ALS's would act as the "Senate" and *all* unaffiliated individual users would all be in the "House."
The House would elect 2 "speakers" (if memory serves...) who would take two seats in the Senate with the accredited ALS's.
(I'm sorry if I have not gotten this right.)
Would it really matter if every unaffiliated Internet user in NA joined the "House"--including lobbyists--etc? I don't know why--because in the end the House only has 2 votes in the Senate.
On the other hand, is there anything to stop anyone --including lobbyists-- from joining every accredited ALS? It seems like that would be a better route. That way, they could certainly multiply their influence, and every ALS gets two votes.
But I don't want to be accused of trying to hold anything up.
JP
unaffiliated Internet user
At 9:27 AM -0400 5/28/07, Thompson, Darlene recently said:
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C7A12B.E653E425"
I agree.
All ALSs go through a process of "approval". What process do individuals have to go through to ensure that they are lobbyists or others that would be unattractive to our group. Unless we create some kind of umbrella group for the individuals that would act as a pseudo-ALS and they could police their own membership (this has been suggested before but I'm not sure by whom). We need some kind of wording clarifying what we would like this to look like.
D
_______________________________________________
NA-Discuss mailing list
---
Draft MoU with ICANN:
Draft Operating Principles:
Draft Code of Conduct: