Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN Fellowships program
Jean, I think you've mixed up descriptors here and the result is likely to give people an incorrect understanding as a consequence. At-Large = the COMMUNITY as a whole, including ALAC ALAC = At-Large Advisory Committee. ICANN staff = ICANN staff At-Large and ALAC are not interchangeable. At-Large and ICANN Staff are not interchangeable, either. At-Large - the community and ALAC the committee have funding via a budget line in the ICANN budget. On 05/05/07, Jean Armour Polly <mom@netmom.com> wrote:
At 12:50 PM -0700 5/4/07, Danny Younger recently said:
Peter Dengate-Thrush offered congratulations on the development of the program but asked why the fellowships appeared limited only to ICANN supporting organizations or committees. Theresa explained that while any resident citizen of a qualifying country could apply, the target audience for the program will be government representatives that wish to participate in the Governmental Advisory Committee, the ccTLD community and the non-profit sector not associated with the At-Large Advisory Committee. The At-Large Advisory Committee already administers its own funding for these purposes.
This is not strictly true. There is a difference between At Large and the At Large Advisory Committee. The former has direct ICANN funding, the latter does not. At Large has funding that it administers but it is incorrect to say that the At Large Advisory Committee administers any funds at all. ALAC can propose expenditures of funds from At-Large, which it sometimes gets, and sometimes does not get. The point is that ALAC cannot just direct At-Large to go out and pay for travel for ICANN constituents, services, research, or anything else. There's a proposal process that has to move up through channels. _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
-- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
At-Large - the community and ALAC the committee have funding via a budget line in the ICANN budget.
Yup, we've seen that.
The At-Large Advisory Committee already administers its own funding for these purposes.
This is not true. ALAC makes requests, ICANN staff decides what to spend. I can think of at least one case where the committee made a specific request to pay someone's way to an ICANN meeting and staff said no. Regards, John Levine, johnl@iecc.com, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies", Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://www.johnlevine.com, ex-Mayor "More Wiener schnitzel, please", said Tom, revealingly.
And if Jean gets the terminology confused after serving on ALAC for two years, imagine what a muddle it must seem to the outside world! Nonetheless, the quoted statement is inaccurate. The ALACommittee does not have administrative control over any funds -- one of the points I have suggested the ALAC independent review consider. --Wendy Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
Jean, I think you've mixed up descriptors here and the result is likely to give people an incorrect understanding as a consequence.
At-Large = the COMMUNITY as a whole, including ALAC ALAC = At-Large Advisory Committee. ICANN staff = ICANN staff
At-Large and ALAC are not interchangeable. At-Large and ICANN Staff are not interchangeable, either.
At-Large - the community and ALAC the committee have funding via a budget line in the ICANN budget.
On 05/05/07, Jean Armour Polly <mom@netmom.com> wrote:
At 12:50 PM -0700 5/4/07, Danny Younger recently said:
Peter Dengate-Thrush offered congratulations on the development of the program but asked why the fellowships appeared limited only to ICANN supporting organizations or committees. Theresa explained that while any resident citizen of a qualifying country could apply, the target audience for the program will be government representatives that wish to participate in the Governmental Advisory Committee, the ccTLD community and the non-profit sector not associated with the At-Large Advisory Committee. The At-Large Advisory Committee already administers its own funding for these purposes.
This is not strictly true. There is a difference between At Large and the At Large Advisory Committee. The former has direct ICANN funding, the latter does not. At Large has funding that it administers but it is incorrect to say that the At Large Advisory Committee administers any funds at all. ALAC can propose expenditures of funds from At-Large, which it sometimes gets, and sometimes does not get. The point is that ALAC cannot just direct At-Large to go out and pay for travel for ICANN constituents, services, research, or anything else. There's a proposal process that has to move up through channels. _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org phone: +1.617.418.3456 / +44 (0)1865 287203 // cell: 07785 550361 Visiting Fellow, Oxford Internet Institute Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html http://www.chillingeffects.org/
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
Jean, I think you've mixed up descriptors here and the result is likely to give people an incorrect understanding as a consequence.
Well, you've both confused me. :-P I was under the impression that the RALO structure was supposed to allow _the_ means for participation of the at-large community. It (supposedly) includes provisions for structures, and for individuals who don't belong to any such structures. (Haven't we just been blowing our collective brains out trying to derive the best way to do this?)
At-Large and ALAC are not interchangeable. At-Large and ICANN Staff are not interchangeable, either.
This of course begs the question of how and why there is an at-large infrastructure in ICANN separate from ALAC. How can this _not_ be seen a utterly redundant? If the "ICANN At-large" mechanism offers a process through which individuals may have a consultative voice, what the heck is the reason for all of _our_ thrashing around on this issue? Why are these separate budget and structural items? If the RALOs select the members of ALAC, why isn't this integrated? And why do ICANN staff have the authority to veto an explicit democraticly-made requests from ALAC? If the ALAC is supposed to serve the interests of the At-Large community, I can understand it making advice to the Board that may be considered and rejected -- but I don't understand why staff have the ability to reject ALAC's mandate. Or maybe the answer is dead simple and I've just read it wrong. This comes across to me like one of those areas in which the long-time participants here and ICANN staff seem to know some sort of secret handshake that the newcomers need to learn over time. - Evan
Hi Nick, no I have explicitly not mixed up descriptors, at least in my own mind, though perhaps I could have expressed myself more clearly. My exact point is that there is the ALAC committee itself, then there is ICANN's "At Large" staff and infrastructure, which is inclusive of ALAC but also includes services to RALOs, ALS's, and the Rest of Us. As evidence I point to the fact that your own title is the Director of At-Large, not ALAC. http://www.icann.org/biog/ashton-hart.htm and the regional liaisons work for ICANN's At-Large group, not ALAC. ALAC never even met them until after they were hired! But there is some confusion in the ICANN budget. Have a look. http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposed-budget-2006-07-clean-24jun06.pdf Unless I am missing something-- I note that "ALAC" is mentioned as follows: 4B Improve and deepen participation in the ICANN process - End Users (ALAC) ALAC FTE 1.50 $690 ,000 "ALAC" is given 1.5 FTE (full time equivalent) employees of its own, according to this budget. It seems ICANN's "At-Large" staff and infrastructure itself is not mentioned, but perhaps I missed it. Is there a confusion of descriptors in ICANN's own budget? That is perhaps one reason why there has been quite a bit of internal confusion in ALAC over whether or not ALAC can actually direct ICANN to expend any of "its" funds, as long as the ICANN financial procedures are followed. The approval of the expenditure of any of ALAC's funds does not lie with ALAC, but with yourself, Denise Michell (Vice President for Policy Development), and those higher up. My point remains: It is a mistake to say that ALAC has administrative control over its own budget. best wishes JP Ex ALAC North America from Nomcom At 12:33 PM +0100 5/5/07, Nick Ashton-Hart recently said:
Jean, I think you've mixed up descriptors here and the result is likely to give people an incorrect understanding as a consequence.
At-Large = the COMMUNITY as a whole, including ALAC ALAC = At-Large Advisory Committee. ICANN staff = ICANN staff
At-Large and ALAC are not interchangeable. At-Large and ICANN Staff are not interchangeable, either.
At-Large - the community and ALAC the committee have funding via a budget line in the ICANN budget.
On 05/05/07, Jean Armour Polly <mom@netmom.com> wrote:
At 12:50 PM -0700 5/4/07, Danny Younger recently said:
Peter Dengate-Thrush offered congratulations on the development of the program but asked why the fellowships appeared limited only to ICANN supporting organizations or committees. Theresa explained that while any resident citizen of a qualifying country could apply, the target audience for the program will be government representatives that wish to participate in the Governmental Advisory Committee, the ccTLD community and the non-profit sector not associated with the At-Large Advisory Committee. The At-Large Advisory Committee already administers its own funding for these purposes.
This is not strictly true. There is a difference between At Large and the At Large Advisory Committee. The former has direct ICANN funding, the latter does not. At Large has funding that it administers but it is incorrect to say that the At Large Advisory Committee administers any funds at all. ALAC can propose expenditures of funds from At-Large, which it sometimes gets, and sometimes does not get. The point is that ALAC cannot just direct At-Large to go out and pay for travel for ICANN constituents, services, research, or anything else. There's a proposal process that has to move up through channels. _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica... --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct
-- -- Regards,
Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
HI Jean The regional liaisons report to Theresa Swinehart, not Denise Michel and are not AtLArge – they are part of ICANN’s Global Partnerships group. They work for all the constituencies and all the areas of ICANn, including AtLarge, but are not focused on atLarge. They have been a huge help in the RALO formation process, but really aren’t only for us. Hope this clarifies. Jacqueline From: Jean Armour Polly [mailto:mom@netmom.com] Sent: Saturday, May 05, 2007 11:42 AM To: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] ICANN Fellowships program Hi Nick, no I have explicitly not mixed up descriptors, at least in my own mind, though perhaps I could have expressed myself more clearly. My exact point is that there is the ALAC committee itself, then there is ICANN's "At Large" staff and infrastructure, which is inclusive of ALAC but also includes services to RALOs, ALS's, and the Rest of Us. As evidence I point to the fact that your own title is the Director of At-Large, not ALAC. http://www.icann.org/biog/ashton-hart.htm and the regional liaisons work for ICANN's At-Large group, not ALAC. ALAC never even met them until after they were hired! But there is some confusion in the ICANN budget. Have a look. http://www.icann.org/announcements/proposed-budget-2006-07-clean-24jun06.pdf Unless I am missing something-- I note that "ALAC" is mentioned as follows: 4B Improve and deepen participation in the ICANN process - End Users (ALAC) ALAC FTE 1.50 $690 ,000 "ALAC" is given 1.5 FTE (full time equivalent) employees of its own, according to this budget. It seems ICANN's "At-Large" staff and infrastructure itself is not mentioned, but perhaps I missed it. Is there a confusion of descriptors in ICANN's own budget? That is perhaps one reason why there has been quite a bit of internal confusion in ALAC over whether or not ALAC can actually direct ICANN to expend any of "its" funds, as long as the ICANN financial procedures are followed. The approval of the expenditure of any of ALAC's funds does not lie with ALAC, but with yourself, Denise Michell (Vice President for Policy Development), and those higher up. My point remains: It is a mistake to say that ALAC has administrative control over its own budget. best wishes JP Ex ALAC North America from Nomcom At 12:33 PM +0100 5/5/07, Nick Ashton-Hart recently said: Jean, I think you've mixed up descriptors here and the result is likely to give people an incorrect understanding as a consequence. At-Large = the COMMUNITY as a whole, including ALAC ALAC = At-Large Advisory Committee. ICANN staff = ICANN staff At-Large and ALAC are not interchangeable. At-Large and ICANN Staff are not interchangeable, either. At-Large - the community and ALAC the committee have funding via a budget line in the ICANN budget. On 05/05/07, Jean Armour Polly <mom@netmom.com> wrote: At 12:50 PM -0700 5/4/07, Danny Younger recently said: Peter Dengate-Thrush offered congratulations on the development of the program but asked why the fellowships appeared limited only to ICANN supporting organizations or committees. Theresa explained that while any resident citizen of a qualifying country could apply, the target audience for the program will be government representatives that wish to participate in the Governmental Advisory Committee, the ccTLD community and the non-profit sector not associated with the At-Large Advisory Committee. The At-Large Advisory Committee already administers its own funding for these purposes. This is not strictly true. There is a difference between At Large and the At Large Advisory Committee. The former has direct ICANN funding, the latter does not. At Large has funding that it administers but it is incorrect to say that the At Large Advisory Committee administers any funds at all. ALAC can propose expenditures of funds from At-Large, which it sometimes gets, and sometimes does not get. The point is that ALAC cannot just direct At-Large to go out and pay for travel for ICANN constituents, services, research, or anything else. There's a proposal process that has to move up through channels. _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica nn.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.4/790 - Release Date: 5/5/2007 10:34 AM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.6.4/790 - Release Date: 5/5/2007 10:34 AM
participants (6)
-
Evan Leibovitch -
Jacqueline A. Morris -
Jean Armour Polly -
John L -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Wendy Seltzer