At 01/06/2013 01:20 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
On 5/31/13 7:49 PM, Alan Greenberg wrote:
Regarding the selection of the unaffiliated rep, the procedures also cover that, and as one of the final acts as this year's rep, I will oversee the process.
As a reminder to anyone who is interested, to be an unaffiliated member of NARALO, one must submit a Statement of Interest indicating that he/she meet the following criteria:
- be subscribed to the NA-Discuss list; - be a permanent resident of one of the countries/territories in the North American region as defined by ICANN; - not be a member of a certified ALS.
Such an unaffiliated membership continues until or unless one of the criteria is fails to be satisfied (ie leaves the list, ceases to be a resident of NA, or is a member of an organization that is or becomes a NARALO ALS).
I note that membership in ISOC Canada, which has just become an ALS, is an example of a reason for losing unaffiliated status.
Thank you Alan. This is Rule 17.
ISOC Chapters come and go. A former co-worker at CORE has been starting a chapter in Norway, where a chapter existed, became moribund, and finally was dissolved. At Large Structure certifications come and go also.
The 2007 MoU establishing NARALO contains this decertification responsibility:
5. "Agreed Responsiblities of the NARALO" ... f) "Providing advice to the ICANN At Large Advisory Committee about the certification and, if necessary, decertification of different ALSs and the use of outreach and communication tool across the region."
EURALO has a draft decertification procedure document. LACRALO and AFRALO have published substantive criteria. The NARALO criteria is tied only to "voting", and so capable of being met by a single person representing him or her self as an organization.
For instance, the Canadian Association for Open Source appears quiessent, Peter Salus stopped blogging there in 2006, Bill Traynor in 2007, Evan Liebovitch in 2008, with only Russell McOrmond continuing to January, 2012. No "recent posts" reflected in its log for the past twelve months, three only in the past twenty four months, six only, and all by the same person, for the past 36 months.
I've no idea how this particular structure continues to meet the ALAC certification criteria.
Another peculiarity is Knujon, which appears to be two persons, Garth and Robert Bruen, principals of a Massachusetts LLC and a Vermont S-Corp, respectively, with a freemium business model (free reports with a premium enhanced reports) and the interesting claim of "possibly 10,000" of what are described as "unaffiliated or unregistered members", along with "1000" of what are described as "Registered clients".
I've no idea how this particular structure ever could have met the ALAC certification criteria. BC membership, reasonably, but ALS requires due diligence by ICANN Staff which "could include, without limitation, ... requiring the applicant to demonstrate the identity of their individual constituents."
This isn't to say the Bruen brothers businesses don't do good things, but it is odd to construe the enablement, participation and membership criteria (1, 2 and 4 of the minimum criteria for an At-Large Structure) as something that could possibly be met by two legal persons, whether siblings or private benefit corporations.
This just happened to also catch my eye -- the latest statistics for the web405 website (recall the enablement, participation and membership criteria) is from November, 2007.
I have a preference for eligible candidates, and for eligible electors.
Eric Brunner-Williams Eugene, Oregon
I will not comment on the specific cases, but I have said many times in many fora that we need to make sure that our (ie ICANN`s) ALSs are indeed viable according to our rules of participation. Moreover, it is probably timely to review those rules and make sure they satisfy today`s needs, or modify them accordingly. Alan