On Jul 14, 2008, at 2:57 PM, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
Thanks Dharma,
This sounds like an excellent idea. I think we'd do well to take examples from this and similar planning processes -- e.g., what would be contained in an "End-User Impact Statement" equivalent to the Environmental Impact Statement required before US federal projects expected to have such impacts.
--Wendy
An "End User Impact Statement" is just what I had in mind drawing on procedures that help non-experts get their minds around complicated processes is exactly along the lines I was thinking. There are probably other tools coming from Community Informatics (such as Michael Maranda works on) and Participatory Design that might also be helpful to look at. I'm glad you like it b/c you'd have to be one of the people to make it happen! -Dharma Dailey
Dharma Dailey wrote:
Dear NARALO Colleagues,
Due to traveling I most likely won't be able to be on the call, but I would like to put an item on the table for your consideration.
I would like to propose that a working group of interested volunteers within NARALO draft an open document to help NA community networking / ICT4D groups identify policies or processes of ICANN that may effect them. This, I think, would help one set of internet users in NA to flag policies that may be of interest to people developing, running, or using networks in under-served areas in NA.
The document I have in mind would be analogous to what planning boards use in NA to methodically narrow down possible environmental problems with proposed building development. Planning boards are comprised of non-experts drawn from the locality. A document known as the Negative Declaration, gives a series of questions organized thematically such as "Would development of this project lead to more than 50,000 gallons of flammable materials being on the premises?" that help non-experts to identify the generic areas of possible concern. This allows for focused discussion of potential problems, setting of priorities. Further, the "Neg Dec" helps identify the scope of the problem, by asking that anytime a "Yes" is found, the planning board must decide whether it is a major impact or a minor impact. Of course, I am proposing a non-binding working document, that would simply help those who don't "know the ropes" of ICANN to hone in on areas that need attention vis a vis the internet users that they represent.
I think its a project that we- NARALO- has the capacity to do well, does not require extensive resources- beyond for the *precious* time of us volunteers! -- and would be a step forward in educating more folks on ICANN policies within the NA context.
It would be great if we could work with ARIN on this to-- they are resourced for education, have excellent people, and are friendly to the mandate of educating people on internet governence. Most likely, 99.9% of such a document in the ICANN context would work for ARIN policy land as well.
Looking forward to hearing your thoughts!
Dharma Dailey Emerging Futures Network
------ 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 ------
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org Visiting Professor, American University Washington College of Law Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/ https://www.torproject.org/