Well, I did not get it but nevertheless we will provide our input. What about using a wiki for this. Otherwise is going to be messy. Eduardo Diaz ISOC-Puerto Rico

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss- bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Thompson, Darlene Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 10:55 AM To: Brendler, Beau; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: TR : Improvement of the win- winrelationshipbetween the Staff and the At-Large Community

Hi all,

Actually, I got this too and I would think that Evan and Robert did, too. So, if everybody could make their comments on this matter on-list it would be great and then we will all be working off of the same page with a united voice.

D

Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson@gov.nu.ca

-----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Brendler, Beau Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 10:33 AM To: NA Discuss Subject: [NA-Discuss] FW: TR : Improvement of the win-win relationshipbetween the Staff and the At-Large Community

Hello, everyone. I got this today -- obviously I can come up with my own answers, but if there is anything specific you want me to say to Frederic, please let me know by Thursday of next week (June 5). Specific suggestions to answer the seven questions are preferred -- I have a lot on my plate as we all do, and don't particularly want to get into debates over things like how the letter is worded, etc.

Thanks

Beau

-----Original Message----- From: Frederic Teboul [mailto:frederic.teboul@icann.org] Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 10:25 AM To: Brendler, Beau Cc: Frederic Teboul Subject: TR : Improvement of the win-win relationship between the Staff and the At-Large Community

Dear Mr. Brendler,

First of all, please allow me to introduce myself in case I have not talked/emailed to you already.

My name is Frederic and since last month, I am your new At-Large Regional Affairs Manager. I began my career in the French Foreign Service in 1997, then I worked for several United Nations' Organizations from 2000 to 2005 and I recently joined ICANN from the private sector. I have a PhD in Social Science, an MA in Political Science and an Executive MBA. I believe that those experiences in the public and private sectors, in a variety of international decision-making environments, working with governments, civil society and industry stakeholders from more than 200 different countries made me ready for my new assignments.

I am trying to identify the best way I could support the 5 RALOs and its ALSes, facilitating their involvement in policy development as well as assisting them in their work representing the individual Internet user's interest in ICANN. Nevertheless, I have to admit that even if I am learning a lot throughout the teleconferences and the interactions with your regional leaders, I need your help and this is why, I have decided to conduct an audit on each RALO, which will certainly lead to a proper business plan.

Therefore, in order to proceed in the most professional, effective and efficient way, I would like to ask you to answer very briefly to the following 7 questions by the end of next week (Friday 6th June):

1. What issues are most important to your RALO and your region? 2. How can we help make your time efficient? 3. What challenges and opportunities do you see for your region? 4. How could we increase interaction between communities? 5. What are the top three priorities you would list for your regions? 6. What are the top three objectives you would like to see achieved for your regions? 7. What are the top three activities you would like to see implemented and practiced in your region?

Last, but certainly not least, in order to facilitate our communication, we would appreciate to receive your full contact information (Email, Office and Skype Addresses, Work and Home Telephones, Fax and Mobile).

I thank you once again for your collaboration in order to answer to this questionnaire BEFORE Friday 6th of June 2008, and I remain at your disposal for any further information or clarifications, which you might require.

Yours Sincerely,

Frederic

Frederic E. Teboul, Ph.D., MBA Manager for At-Large Regional Affairs Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Phone Number: +33 6 3487 0575 (France) & +1 310 578 8642 (USA) Email: frederic.teboul@icann.org AIM/iSight: frederic.teboul@mac.com Jabber: frederic.teboul@jabber.icann.org Skype: frederic.teboul

*** Scanned

------ 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 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.icann.org

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG. Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.24.4 - Release Date: 5/29/2008 12:00 AM

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

Robert Guerra wrote:

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.

Well, we've already asked for -- and I believed Nick has budgeted for -- each RALO to attend up to three events to do outreach. So far I've heard that we should be at N-TEN (to reach the NGO community) and CES (to reach the general public). Both of these are in the US. Is there a suggestion of a Canadian conference at which we should be participating? - Evan

Robert Guerra wrote:

NTEN and CES are two completely different conferences. Exactly right. We don't want to be at multiple shows that talk to the same audiences. That would be a waste of resources.

We don't want to exclusively do outreach to conventional NGOs, nor do we want to exclude them. People involved in computer user groups, for instance, are far more likely to attend a consumer show than an NGO conference. We want to introduce policy making to people who have never thought about it before.

NTEN being far more ngo and user centric, while CES is focused on new consumer electronics products being launched.

I guess that depends on what you consider "users". Both have their own -- extremely different -- user focuses. In your own description you noted the consumer attraction. Isn't the consumer interest the core of At-Large? That's my point. Get to NGOs. Get to the general public. Do both. I am quite tired of -- and find myself repeatedly pushing back against -- a culture within ALAC that actually fears the general public. It is our mission to go far beyond the realm of orgs that are already into policy making. If we limit ourselves to NGOs we are not doing full outreach. It is a must for us to get out of our own comfort zones and talk to people we would not normally talk to. Having said that, I'm not for a moment saying to ignore the NGO community. In fact, I'm suggesting two NGO events and one that is consumer-oriented. In order to get maximum exposure I am suggesting the comferences of each type which attract the most attendees. CES is useful simply because of the sheer volume of technically-aware people it attracts. N-TEN has the attraction of attracting the technology side of orgs whose focus is not primarily on the Internet. I am wondering of there is a similar event in Canada; most of the non-profit conferences of which I'm aware are regional in scope. And enough with "strategic", already, that's merely become a safe euphamism for "elitist". Let's just get on the ground and meet people, as many as we can and with as great a diversity as possible, without constantly making pre-judgement on who are the "right" people to have around. A basic aptitiude for computers and interest in the Internet is required -- without that, explaining ICANN would be near impossible -- but beyond that there should be no limits. THAT is outreach. For At-Large to work we need to get out of the ivory tower. - Evan

There was a CEDNET conference in Saskatoon last week and I believe that one of the Telecommunities Canada directors took ICANN materials with her to that one. Other than materials, though, that is all that was done. D Darlene A. Thompson Community Access Program Administrator Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP P.O. Box 1000, Station 910 Iqaluit, NU X0A 0H0 Phone: (867) 975-5631 Fax: (867) 975-5610 E-mail: dthompson@gov.nu.ca -----Original Message----- From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Evan Leibovitch Sent: Friday, May 30, 2008 12:11 PM To: Robert Guerra Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] FW: TR : Improvement of the win-win relationship between the Staff and the At-Large Community Robert Guerra wrote:

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.

Well, we've already asked for -- and I believed Nick has budgeted for -- each RALO to attend up to three events to do outreach. So far I've heard that we should be at N-TEN (to reach the NGO community) and CES (to reach the general public). Both of these are in the US. Is there a suggestion of a Canadian conference at which we should be participating? - Evan ------ 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 NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------

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 ------