Re: [NA-Discuss] [APAC-Discuss] [At-Large] Independent At-Large Website
Complementary sounds good. But we have to keep our working structures efficient and this is why we should discuss how to best run our website and make sure we have not to do similar work on different spots. And we have to have the possibility to post what we think needs to be posted/published right away. The only possibility to do so is on an independent website. We already discussed, that the ICANN website should contain all the standard information on ALAC/RALO members, ALS accreditation procedure etc. Now, that all RALOs are in place we should work on a very efficient working structure including the need of regional focused work as well as the united work on certain issues on a global level. Best Annette
I believe you all will find that the new website, composed as it will be of many dynamic elements, for example: * Links to external blogs - so the views of anyone and everyone who has a blog will be immediately reflected in the site * Real-time two-way integration between the forums on the site and the At-Large mailing lists Since the site will use keywords to show blog, announcement, and forum/mailing list postings on pages which are relevant to the content. So, for example, if you are on a meeting page, and there have been forum or blog postings relevant to that meeting, they'll appear on the page dynamically. Notices of meetings, meeting agendas, documents related to meetings, etc will be immediately available on the site just as they now are on the wikis - so no delays in postings like we have seen in the past. The design of the new site was deliberately based around the concept that the site for a constituency should reflect that constituency's views, and allow dynamic content development in a way that the current architecture does not. In fact, the process of posting content to the new site will in many ways be simpler than what is currently the case for icannalac.org. On 6 Jul 2007, at 14:54, Annette Muehlberg wrote:
Complementary sounds good. But we have to keep our working structures efficient and this is why we should discuss how to best run our website and make sure we have not to do similar work on different spots. And we have to have the possibility to post what we think needs to be posted/published right away. The only possibility to do so is on an independent website.
We already discussed, that the ICANN website should contain all the standard information on ALAC/RALO members, ALS accreditation procedure etc.
Now, that all RALOs are in place we should work on a very efficient working structure including the need of regional focused work as well as the united work on certain issues on a global level.
Best Annette
Hi--who will choose the RSS /blogs to be carried on the site? For example, icannalac reflects a variety of views, with links to Danny Younger's and Karl Auerbach's blogs among others. If the ALAC committee selects the blogs to be carried can ICANN in ANY WAY refuse to carry the RSS content?
The design of the new site was deliberately based around the concept that the site for a constituency should reflect that constituency's views, and allow dynamic content development in a way that the current architecture does not. In fact, the process of posting content to the new site will in many ways be simpler than what is currently the case for icannalac.org.
Gosh-- posting to icannalac is ridiculously simple--easier than posting to a wiki. But back to the new site -- in the old days of alac.icann.org I recall your boss Denise told us that "not even a comma" could be changed on the official ALAC site without going through ICANN legal. So, I gather that this policy has changed? Nick, how do you see the workflow-- when if ever would ICANN legal get involved with the new site? If they have NO involvement whatsoever with content, that would be reassuring to the ALAC community. Perhaps you could get a written statement from Jeffries (ICANN Counsel) to that effect and we'd be done here. Otherwise it is troubling to think that ICANN legal could always shut the site down and leave the community without a home and without access to its documents and discussions. Seems like the confusion could easily be cleared up with a statement from Jeffries. Thanks JP
Any and all blogs from the community where the blogger is happy to have his blog referenced will be connected (of course the RALOS and ALAC could object to a blog being included if they wished to). The idea is that the dynamic display of all viewpoints would make the whole site more meaningful and thought-provoking. As to the ease of posting to icannalac.org easy - I didn't find it anything like as easy as posting to a Wiki, and the layers of approval also seemed to me counterintuitive and difficult. I believe some members of the community once commented in a similar vein. Since the community and members of the community do post to the wikis, and not to icannalac.org - which is referenced in each new ALS welcome letter as well as listed on all the wikis under links, and on the alac.icann.org site - I can only imagine that I wasn't the only one who found it difficult. see below for more. On 6 Jul 2007, at 17:55, Jean Armour Polly wrote:
Hi--who will choose the RSS /blogs to be carried on the site? For example, icannalac reflects a variety of views, with links to Danny Younger's and Karl Auerbach's blogs among others. If the ALAC committee selects the blogs to be carried can ICANN in ANY WAY refuse to carry the RSS content?
The design of the new site was deliberately based around the concept that the site for a constituency should reflect that constituency's views, and allow dynamic content development in a way that the current architecture does not. In fact, the process of posting content to the new site will in many ways be simpler than what is currently the case for icannalac.org.
Gosh-- posting to icannalac is ridiculously simple--easier than posting to a wiki. But back to the new site -- in the old days of alac.icann.org I recall your boss Denise told us that "not even a comma" could be changed on the official ALAC site without going through ICANN legal. So, I gather that this policy has changed?
There will be more on this subject in due course.
Nick, how do you see the workflow-- when if ever would ICANN legal get involved with the new site?
See above. I'm sorry I cannot say more at the present.
If they have NO involvement whatsoever with content, that would be reassuring to the ALAC community. Perhaps you could get a written statement from Jeffries (ICANN Counsel) to that effect and we'd be done here. Otherwise it is troubling to think that ICANN legal could always shut the site down and leave the community without a home and without access to its documents and discussions. Seems like the confusion could easily be cleared up with a statement from Jeffries.
There is not now, nor has there ever been, the possibility that the GC would shut down an entire community website for any reason. If there were a legal objection to a given statement or document it would be simply done because the GC believed that it would lead to lawsuits against ICANN. There is no censoring of ideas in this policy, though I think it is widely known that there is less than complete admiration for the fact that such complete review of every posting is currently necessary.
Thanks JP
So, are we saying that this site will be the primary form of communication now? It would be nice, rather than having this email list as our primary. For me at least, this email list is a little too much. However, I think the spammers got ahold of the site as well, just as they did with mine. My apologies for missing the conference call. Could you see that a link to AmericaAtLarge.US gets on there somewhere? Thanks! Randy Glass A@L On 7/9/07, Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart@icann.org> wrote:
Any and all blogs from the community where the blogger is happy to have his blog referenced will be connected (of course the RALOS and ALAC could object to a blog being included if they wished to). The idea is that the dynamic display of all viewpoints would make the whole site more meaningful and thought-provoking.
As to the ease of posting to icannalac.org easy - I didn't find it anything like as easy as posting to a Wiki, and the layers of approval also seemed to me counterintuitive and difficult. I believe some members of the community once commented in a similar vein.
Since the community and members of the community do post to the wikis, and not to icannalac.org - which is referenced in each new ALS welcome letter as well as listed on all the wikis under links, and on the alac.icann.org site - I can only imagine that I wasn't the only one who found it difficult.
see below for more.
On 6 Jul 2007, at 17:55, Jean Armour Polly wrote:
Hi--who will choose the RSS /blogs to be carried on the site? For example, icannalac reflects a variety of views, with links to Danny Younger's and Karl Auerbach's blogs among others. If the ALAC committee selects the blogs to be carried can ICANN in ANY WAY refuse to carry the RSS content?
The design of the new site was deliberately based around the concept that the site for a constituency should reflect that constituency's views, and allow dynamic content development in a way that the current architecture does not. In fact, the process of posting content to the new site will in many ways be simpler than what is currently the case for icannalac.org.
Gosh-- posting to icannalac is ridiculously simple--easier than posting to a wiki. But back to the new site -- in the old days of alac.icann.org I recall your boss Denise told us that "not even a comma" could be changed on the official ALAC site without going through ICANN legal. So, I gather that this policy has changed?
There will be more on this subject in due course.
Nick, how do you see the workflow-- when if ever would ICANN legal get involved with the new site?
See above. I'm sorry I cannot say more at the present.
If they have NO involvement whatsoever with content, that would be reassuring to the ALAC community. Perhaps you could get a written statement from Jeffries (ICANN Counsel) to that effect and we'd be done here. Otherwise it is troubling to think that ICANN legal could always shut the site down and leave the community without a home and without access to its documents and discussions. Seems like the confusion could easily be cleared up with a statement from Jeffries.
There is not now, nor has there ever been, the possibility that the GC would shut down an entire community website for any reason. If there were a legal objection to a given statement or document it would be simply done because the GC believed that it would lead to lawsuits against ICANN. There is no censoring of ideas in this policy, though I think it is widely known that there is less than complete admiration for the fact that such complete review of every posting is currently necessary.
Thanks JP
_______________________________________________ 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
-- ------------------------- AmericaAtLarge.org RJPacific.com DDMF.org
participants (4)
-
Annette Muehlberg -
Jean Armour Polly -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
RJGlass | America＠Large