<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [alac] Action points / proposals from the Rome meetings



Sorry for this very belated response, as usual, after long trip comes
lots of works waiting back home.


At 12:36 04/03/05 +0100, you wrote:
I have actually decided to send this list now, even if I didn't have time to
double-check it, so that we can start discussing it. It mostly cover
internal organization - doesn't cover policy or outreach activities too
much. Feel free to comment and correct; especially, those members who
weren't in Rome are encouraged to make any objections. I'd like to get these
action points finalized in a few days from now.

1. We should regularly ask ALSs to provide volunteers for policy work
whenever necessary.

I think we should ask ALSs to send their people, as well as any other
person who is interested in and qualified, him/herself, or recommended
by ALSs.

2. We should move liaison reports out of conference calls to save time (see
next point).

3. Every liaison, task force member etc. is to send a report to the mailing
list at the end of each month.

Unless there is no move during that month, right?

4. We should establish the expiration terms of all positions (Chair,
vice-Chair, liaisons...) and possibly formally reappoint / reconsider the
original ones. (Proposal: I think all terms should be aligned with the
annual meeting, so that we reappoint positions when new members come in)

Setting terms is a good idea. However I wonder if ALL the terms should
expire at the same time.

5. We should revise and define better the role and number of the
vice-Chairs.

I think "Vice-Chairs" have two different roles. One is to assist
the Chair, or take-over in case. Another is to assume some
important roles to move the committee's activities.


6. We should try to work together with the NCUC. Proposals:
        a. shall we try to make joint policy statements with the NCUC, as
far as possible? You could actually label them as "user constituencies
statements", or better "civil society" (business users are users!).

Why not a trial?

        b. shall we have joint public meetings on the constituency day? it's
possibly useless to have our public meeting and then theirs, discussing the
same things.

Well, for matters of common interest, sure. But AL's regional acvitities, formation
of ALS and RALO may not be of their interest. Likewise, some of their
immediate interests may not be ours.  So, to have common slot is fine,
but we need separate meetings, too, right?


7. Each Region has to send a roadmap for RALO creation + outreach +
staffing/budgeting plan by two weeks from now. Possibly, this might include
regional staffing requests. Also, please feel free to include requests for
non-At-Large budget items (for example, I think the Committee should require
ICANN to have a translation budget to support translations for all
constituencies).

8. Each Region has to send a report and update plan on outreach and RALO
creation by two weeks before each ICANN meeting.

OK.

9. Someone has suggested that each Region could appoint, even informally,
one member who is responsible for this and, more generally, to manage
regional outreach and applications: shall we do so? It would possibly help
me in knowing who to bug when applications are to be reviewed etc.

Agreed.

10. There should be some work to formally establish the long-term mission
and vision of what a RALO is and what is going to happen after we start them
(could this turn into appointing a couple of members to specifically do so
in a document by KL meeting?)

I am not suer on this, I mean, are we really ready? is my question.
But if Europe could go ahead, I think that may be the case.

11. Accreditation process is confirmed, but we will try to formalize it a
little more: after each Region finishes the review, there will be two weeks
of "internal public comment", and there will be formal notice of its end.
After it ends (unless important objections arise) vote will be called and
members can vote, but no more discussion.

12. Having a website is not a requirement to be accredited as ALS.

Well, there was "minimum criteria" for ALS:

"offering Internet-based mechanisms that enable discussions of one or
more of these activities and issues among individual constituents/members"
That is not a website, but at least mailing list of some kind.
This could be "jointly" done by ALSs, depending on local situation
and lingusitic situation, too.

Having their own website is not needed, I agree. Use ALAC's website
it totally OK.

13. Should we move all our conversations to the public list, except those
that are strictly confidential? (We are constantly being challenged on this
issue, both at ICANN public meetings and on online forums... I'd recommend
to move all discussion to the public list as far as possible)

I strongly support this.

14. We should request a liaison to the ccNSO.

Yes. No question.

15. We should set up a document repository (FTP? web based?) where to
archive and share all Committee documents.

Yes, very much needed. Simple blog as an Interface?

16. We should possibly set up regional mailing lists and websites, at least
for those Regions that feel the need to do so; depending on the Region, we
might use ICANN resources or use any other resources which we might find and
which might be easier for day-by-day management.

There is one we are starting to use at APNG (Asia Pacific Networking Group)
website. where not much is happening, but still it offers a platform.

17. We should find a way to revitalize our forum and/or replace it with
something more appealing to users. (Proposal: shall we merge it with the GA
list?)

Though Denise said it is moderated, I think it is not - there are
too many spam mails there!  Merging with GA, or adding a new list
with GA may work.

18. We should find a way to make the als-discuss list operational and
active. (Proposal: shall we appoint one of us as "facilitator" for public
communication, with the specific responsibility to oversee public discussion
mailing lists?)

I would recommend to have two people, perhaps, than only one facilitator.
Unless we have "superman/women".

19. As soon as a regional office is established, we should use that as a
contact address.

Of course. But it may take too much time for come regions. Could we try
to find an ALS to be the regional rep, with say limited term, if that is
better.

20. We should make sure we can get agendas and documents finalized in
advance of the ICANN meetings and printed out. (I will possibly try to put
together a very brief "organizational chart" so that the responsibilities of
staff and of individual members that are appointed to positions are clear.)

I think we should ask more of "Secretariat" function under the guidance
of Chair.  If Vittorio could take a lead, we should consider to hire
a secretary closely working with you. Making remote arrangement
with Denise and ICANN staff in different time-zone, with only
e-mail instruction/communication may not become sufficient.
Whould't we propose that as part of our budget?

Many thanks,

izumi