"We can't be bothered to vote; so just send us the travel vouchers for Cairo"
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote: 1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Carlos Aguirre 4 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 5 Hawa Diakite 6 Thu Hue Nguyen 7 Vanda Scartezini 8 Fatimata Seye Sylla Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new "Remedial" participation policy. At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
Hi Danny Similar participation rate for the Vote on ratification of the Statement on GNSO Restructuring - 8 votes. Are ppl travelling or otherwise offline? I would look for reasons before assuming that they "decided to ignore" or didn't care to vote... Maybe we should ask why before assigning negative reasons? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote:
1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Carlos Aguirre 4 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 5 Hawa Diakite 6 Thu Hue Nguyen 7 Vanda Scartezini 8 Fatimata Seye Sylla
Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new "Remedial" participation policy. At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Question: Aren't these votes usually open for at least a week? If so, then I just can't believe that 8 ALAC members would be off-line for an entire week. How time consuming is it to go on-line and vote? It is also a concern when the same names keep popping up again and again as non-voters and non-meeting attendees but are ALWAYS at the f2f meetings. I'm not as out-spoken as Danny but I am starting to become rather concerned. I'd also like to thank staff for providing us with these stats. 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: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 9:45 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [At-Large] "We can't be bothered to vote; so just send us the travel vouchers for Cairo" Hi Danny Similar participation rate for the Vote on ratification of the Statement on GNSO Restructuring - 8 votes. Are ppl travelling or otherwise offline? I would look for reasons before assuming that they "decided to ignore" or didn't care to vote... Maybe we should ask why before assigning negative reasons? Jacqueline Danny Younger wrote:
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote:
1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Carlos Aguirre 4 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 5 Hawa Diakite 6 Thu Hue Nguyen 7 Vanda Scartezini 8 Fatimata Seye Sylla
Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new "Remedial" participation policy. At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
Some are not always at the f2f- Thu wasn't at Paris... But I understand your point. :) also - yes, it is quite possible to be offline for an entire week. I was earlier this year when I was on vacation with my parents... also when I had to go to the bush for a meeting for 6 days- there was very little access and it was difficult to get to. Internet was really really hard to come by. Once I was at a venue for a retreat and it's a good thing I drove myself and didn't go in the transport - I had to drive nearly 20k to the village to get internet access on my blackberry! There were no internet cafes or anything! I'm sure people had internet, but I wasn't going to knock on a stranger's door and ask - hey can i use your internet? :) I don't know how it is in Africa or in Vietnam... i just think they should be allowed to tell us why before we assume negative stuff. But the stats are useful - thanks Staff! Luv and hugs! Jacqueline Thompson, Darlene wrote:
Question:
Aren't these votes usually open for at least a week? If so, then I just can't believe that 8 ALAC members would be off-line for an entire week. How time consuming is it to go on-line and vote?
It is also a concern when the same names keep popping up again and again as non-voters and non-meeting attendees but are ALWAYS at the f2f meetings.
I'm not as out-spoken as Danny but I am starting to become rather concerned. I'd also like to thank staff for providing us with these stats.
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: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 9:45 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [At-Large] "We can't be bothered to vote; so just send us the travel vouchers for Cairo"
Hi Danny Similar participation rate for the Vote on ratification of the Statement
on GNSO Restructuring - 8 votes. Are ppl travelling or otherwise offline? I would look for reasons before
assuming that they "decided to ignore" or didn't care to vote... Maybe we should ask why before assigning negative reasons? Jacqueline
Danny Younger wrote:
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members
decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote:
1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Carlos Aguirre 4 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 5 Hawa Diakite 6 Thu Hue Nguyen 7 Vanda Scartezini 8 Fatimata Seye Sylla
Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new
"Remedial" participation policy. At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.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 ------
Dear Darlene: Many thanks for your thanks however, thanks are really due to the Chair of the ALAC for making transparency in so many ways, and performance indicator publication, a priority, and for the ALAC and the community for supporting these measures. <personal opinion mode on> May I take this opportunity to note that it is our understanding that At-Large is the only community where leaders have established participation requirements, and also the only community in ICANN which publishes information about the performance of those the requirements cover. I believe this is something that many others in ICANN are not aware of and that these initiatives are very much to the community¹s credit. <personal opinion mode off> On 26/09/2008 15:53, "Thompson, Darlene" <DThompson@GOV.NU.CA> wrote:
Question:
Aren't these votes usually open for at least a week? If so, then I just can't believe that 8 ALAC members would be off-line for an entire week. How time consuming is it to go on-line and vote?
It is also a concern when the same names keep popping up again and again as non-voters and non-meeting attendees but are ALWAYS at the f2f meetings.
I'm not as out-spoken as Danny but I am starting to become rather concerned. I'd also like to thank staff for providing us with these stats.
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: at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:at-large-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline A. Morris Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 9:45 AM To: At-Large Worldwide Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [At-Large] "We can't be bothered to vote; so just send us the travel vouchers for Cairo"
Hi Danny Similar participation rate for the Vote on ratification of the Statement
on GNSO Restructuring - 8 votes. Are ppl travelling or otherwise offline? I would look for reasons before
assuming that they "decided to ignore" or didn't care to vote... Maybe we should ask why before assigning negative reasons? Jacqueline
Danny Younger wrote:
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote:
1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Carlos Aguirre 4 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 5 Hawa Diakite 6 Thu Hue Nguyen 7 Vanda Scartezini 8 Fatimata Seye Sylla
Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new "Remedial" participation policy. At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.i cann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann... rg
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
-- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director for At-Large Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Main Tel: +33 (450) 40 46 88 USA DD: +1 (310) 578-8637 Fax: +41 (22) 594-85-44 Mobile: +41 (79) 595 54-68 email: nick.ashton-hart@icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart@hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart@mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart
Thanks to Nick for just posting the results of the ALAC member vote on the ALAC Statement on GNSO Restructuring -- see http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/2008/0... This time only seven ALAC members chose not to vote: 1 Izumi Aizu 2 Annette Muehlberg 3 Jose Ovidio Salgueiro 4 Hawa Diakite 5 Robert Guerra 6 Vanda Scartezini 7 Fatimata Seye Sylla
Jacqueline, We have all seen Staff's ALAC Member Participation Report and the recently released Liaison Participation Report. This is not a single instance of non-participation, this is part of an ongoing trend that is getting worse by the day. Most ALAC members are not discussing policy initiatives on-line, many are not attending teleconferences as required, nor casting votes as required. Lately, the ALAC can't even get an attendance quorum at its monthly meetings. ALAC members themselves agreed to certain rules governing participation -- those rules basically said that if the member doesn't participate at a certain minimal level, the Chair will ask that member to resign. The ALAC is now well below those minimum participation levels and resignations are clearly warranted. If the ALAC won't even abide by its own rules set by its own members, then how can you expect anyone to take the ALAC seriously? --- On Fri, 9/26/08, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com> wrote:
From: Jacqueline A. Morris <jam@jacquelinemorris.com> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] "We can't be bothered to vote; so just send us the travel vouchers for Cairo" To: "At-Large Worldwide" <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Date: Friday, September 26, 2008, 9:45 AM Hi Danny Similar participation rate for the Vote on ratification of the Statement on GNSO Restructuring - 8 votes. Are ppl travelling or otherwise offline? I would look for reasons before assuming that they "decided to ignore" or didn't care to vote... Maybe we should ask why before assigning negative reasons? Jacqueline
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Danny Younger wrote:
In another fine display of participant zeal, eight ALAC members decided to ignore yet another ALAC vote -- this time on the Overview Report on the ALAC Review. Those listed below (more than half of the ALAC) did not bother to vote:
While I take tiny comfort that (for once) there are no North Americans on the list, it bothers me that counts like this, which are not even meetings (which can conflict) but "do it on your own time" votes, cannot even get a majority.
Kudos to the ALAC Chair for the great results obtained under the new "Remedial" participation policy.
To the Chair's defence, there is a real limit on what she can do. The list of no-shows includes 80% of the NonComm appointees to ALAC, who are not subject to recall, accountable to nobody and are free to flip the bird at Cheryl. I have already spoken to the Chair on attendance issues regarding the tardy ALACers from our region, and some behind-the-scenes followup is being done. To our great credit, the person from our region who owes no accountability to NARALO happens to have one of the best attendance records in ALAC.
At this rate, the ALAC will be dead and buried soon.
Isn't that what you want, Danny? Of a greater overall worry to me is the fact that NARALO's continued pro-activity, combined with a clear lethargy in other regions, will again lead to sentiment that ICANN -- even in its public participation component -- is dominated by Amercians (and to a lesser extent Europeans). Is it our fault that we seem to be the only ones actually initiating anything? It seems as no coincidence that both of the candidates for ALAC Board rep are from our region. Is the creation of two more unaccountable ALAC reps from Asia, as the Westlake report recommend really going to do ANYTHING to solve this? And with ICANN starving At-Large for outreach funding, how are we going to seek out those who actually give a damn but aren't overly assertive about it? - - Evan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFI3OqHB6WWYxnsgmwRAobzAKClJF7saRtBhEwfoqjFP1nASmkq8QCgk2Ju SnTwzIlqV9nUD+2eEilUlEo= =lEuk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
I just wrote:
Of a greater overall worry to me is the fact that NARALO's continued pro-activity, combined with a clear lethargy in other regions, will again lead to sentiment that ICANN -- even in its public participation component -- is dominated by Amercians (and to a lesser extent Europeans). Is it our fault that we seem to be the only ones actually initiating anything? It seems as no coincidence that both of the candidates for ALAC Board rep are from our region.
Before anyone jumps on me, I am not putting down the contributions from other regions of which there are many. On re-reading this, I can see how insult could be extracted from this where none was intended and I apologize in that case. However, it is accurate to state that in NARALO meetings we spend far more time creating initiatives, than we spend reacting to (and collaborating with) initiatives started in other regions or even from within ALAC. I find that disturbing. - Evan
You are right and I wonder if it's as LACRALO says- the language issue - English speakers are better informed in advance of issues - these are not often covered in Spanish -language blogs, documents, news etc. LACRALO, it seems to me, gets most of its ICANN news from ICANN - NARALO has a LOT of other sources, and posts on NARALO list are sometimes forwarded to other regions, but still with no translation :( Jacqueline Evan Leibovitch wrote:
I just wrote:
Of a greater overall worry to me is the fact that NARALO's continued pro-activity, combined with a clear lethargy in other regions, will again lead to sentiment that ICANN -- even in its public participation component -- is dominated by Amercians (and to a lesser extent Europeans). Is it our fault that we seem to be the only ones actually initiating anything? It seems as no coincidence that both of the candidates for ALAC Board rep are from our region.
Before anyone jumps on me, I am not putting down the contributions from other regions of which there are many. On re-reading this, I can see how insult could be extracted from this where none was intended and I apologize in that case.
However, it is accurate to state that in NARALO meetings we spend far more time creating initiatives, than we spend reacting to (and collaborating with) initiatives started in other regions or even from within ALAC. I find that disturbing.
- Evan
------ 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 ------
participants (5)
-
Danny Younger -
Evan Leibovitch -
Jacqueline A. Morris -
Nick Ashton-Hart -
Thompson, Darlene