Mailing Lists
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Posted July 14th, 2009 by Mailing list user
Dear Excom:
We've taken the liberty of including a number of items for your agenda
tomorrow, though of course it is a draft agenda until you adopt it.
You'll recall mention of these items previously and that the Staff were
asked to produce drafts in relation to items 3 and 4 at your meeting at
the end of the Sydney meeting.
The agenda may be reviewed at
https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009.
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
Fair enough.
In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
working group.
Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
/
"Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
- Evan
PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
_______________________________________________
ALAC-ExCom mailing list
ALAC-ExCom@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-excom_atlarge-lists...
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
Fair enough.
In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
working group.
Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
/
"Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
- Evan
PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
Dear Evan: A lot of time before the events happened, I said this . The "de facto" Ex Comm is much more dangerous than the inactivity. Ex Comm have to work only when the situations need a fast solution, not in other moments. ALAC is a body; Not two differents things, where we have a select group of illuminated, and other which see the train pass only. When I said my possition against the creation of Ex Comm, I was talking about that. And unfortunatly I had reason.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:34:46 -0400
> From: evan@telly.org
> To: staff@atlarge.icann.org
> CC: alac-excom@atlarge-lists.icann.org; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
>
> https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
>
> Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
> Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
> was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
> timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
> was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
> could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
> working group.
>
> Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
> working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
> groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
> recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
> draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
> ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
>
> Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
> subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
>
> Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
> of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
> descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
> /
> "Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
> full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
>
> Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
> ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
> such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
>
> The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
> serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
> effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
> much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
> functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
> conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
> the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
> anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
>
> - Evan
>
> PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
> at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
> to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
> badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
> ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
> ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
_________________________________________________________________
Disfrutá los mejores videos de MSN mientras chateas
http://messengertv.msn.com/mkt/es-ar/
_______________________________________________
ALAC-ExCom mailing list
ALAC-ExCom@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-excom_atlarge-lists...
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
Dear Evan:
It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the substance of your
comments of course, but with respect to the technical issues: there is
no impediment to anyone on ALAC or the RALOs joining Excom calls (which
is of course why their agendas are public and their meetings are announced).
Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
>
> Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
> Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
> was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
> timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
> was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
> could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
> working group.
>
> Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
> working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
> groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
> recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
> draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
> ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
>
> Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
> subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
>
> Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
> of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
> descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
> /
> "Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
> full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
>
> Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
> ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
> such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
>
> The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
> serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
> effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
> much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
> functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
> conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
> the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
> anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
>
> - Evan
>
> PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
> at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
> to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
> badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
> ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
> ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear Evan:
It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the substance of your
comments of course, but with respect to the technical issues: there is
no impediment to anyone on ALAC or the RALOs joining Excom calls (which
is of course why their agendas are public and their meetings are announced).
Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
>
> Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
> Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
> was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
> timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
> was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
> could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
> working group.
>
> Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
> working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
> groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
> recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
> draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
> ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
>
> Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
> subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
>
> Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
> of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
> descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
> /
> "Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
> full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
>
> Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
> ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
> such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
>
> The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
> serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
> effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
> much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
> functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
> conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
> the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
> anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
>
> - Evan
>
> PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
> at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
> to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
> badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
> ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
> ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the substance of
> your comments of course, but with respect to the technical issues:
> there is no impediment to anyone on ALAC or the RALOs joining Excom
> calls (which is of course why their agendas are public and their
> meetings are announced).
Sure, and that much is appreciated. However, it's still a group of
closed membership, taking on a role that has no business being assigned
to a group of closed membership.
I've already experienced ALAC meetings at which my "hand up" isn't
recognized until all "official" members have exhausted themselves. I
would expect ExecComm meetings to be even a further step removed from
full participation. And meeting attendance, just for the sake of being
in the audience, is not a good use of my time.
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC-ExCom mailing list
ALAC-ExCom@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-excom_atlarge-lists...
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> It would not be appropriate for me to comment on the substance of
> your comments of course, but with respect to the technical issues:
> there is no impediment to anyone on ALAC or the RALOs joining Excom
> calls (which is of course why their agendas are public and their
> meetings are announced).
Sure, and that much is appreciated. However, it's still a group of
closed membership, taking on a role that has no business being assigned
to a group of closed membership.
I've already experienced ALAC meetings at which my "hand up" isn't
recognized until all "official" members have exhausted themselves. I
would expect ExecComm meetings to be even a further step removed from
full participation. And meeting attendance, just for the sake of being
in the audience, is not a good use of my time.
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
I have to agree with Evan and Carlos.
This group was never to have regular meetings but just be there for
emergencies. IMHO, this is completely against what ALAC is supposed to
stand for (openness, transparency and a voice from the public).
This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
I have to agree with Evan and Carlos.
This group was never to have regular meetings but just be there for
emergencies. IMHO, this is completely against what ALAC is supposed to
stand for (openness, transparency and a voice from the public).
This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Wow!
Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your
exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can
I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from
the outside.
However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was
substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored.
Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then
they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being
from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has
cleaned house at least once.
We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also
have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those
performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also
for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't
show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and
comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a
judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be
reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around
ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for
reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go
back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not
performing and get rid of the ExComm.
I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio
"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh
in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should
be done but something needs to change.
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
The issue of performance guidelines, which based on discussions prior
to and in Sydney led to the clear need for a Job Description, all
falls on my plate.
Knowing that I would be rather busy with other matters for a few
weeks after Sydney, and that Cheryl would be out of commission for a
while, we asked staff to do the first draft of a job description. You
alluded to the last performance paper that crashed and burnt - I most
definitely did not want that to happen to this new document, so it
seemed wise for someone other than staff to look at it before opening
full comments. THAT is why it was on the agenda. How would you have
done it differently?
I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does
that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with
and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole
responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through
with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to
happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really
want. No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct.
Alan
At 14/07/2009 03:22 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>Wow!
>
>Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your
>exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can
>I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from
>the outside.
>
>However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was
>substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored.
>
>Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then
>they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being
>from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has
>cleaned house at least once.
>
>We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also
>have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those
>performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also
>for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't
>show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and
>comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a
>judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be
>reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around
>ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for
>reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go
>back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not
>performing and get rid of the ExComm.
>
>I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio
>"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh
>in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should
>be done but something needs to change.
>
>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
>
>
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
Thompson, Darlene wrote:
> This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
> of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
> needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
>
It's not the structure that's at fault so much as under-performance by
ALAC members.
I notice that the new documents include a job description for ALAC
members which details what's expected of them, but lacks any "or else"
clauses describing what should happen if those expectations are not met.
So far in the history of ALAC there has been only one person who has
left their position because of poor performance, and that happened only
because of RALO initiative. ALAC, rather than policing itself, has
chosen the ExecComm as an expedient dodge.
(which reminds me ... it seems to have been quite a while since staff
produced its last performance chart...)
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC-ExCom mailing list
ALAC-ExCom@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac-excom_atlarge-lists...
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
At 14/07/2009 01:21 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
>of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
>needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
Every time I post something asking for input and comments, I
typically get one or two comments. From the rest of the committee,
silence. And mostly from those members who comprise the evil ExCom
(Adam being the one exception).
If those who really care about ALAC and At-large were serious, there
would be more action to get ALAC members to actually participate and
not just criticize.
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Thompson, Darlene wrote:
> This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
> of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
> needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
>
It's not the structure that's at fault so much as under-performance by
ALAC members.
I notice that the new documents include a job description for ALAC
members which details what's expected of them, but lacks any "or else"
clauses describing what should happen if those expectations are not met.
So far in the history of ALAC there has been only one person who has
left their position because of poor performance, and that happened only
because of RALO initiative. ALAC, rather than policing itself, has
chosen the ExecComm as an expedient dodge.
(which reminds me ... it seems to have been quite a while since staff
produced its last performance chart...)
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] [ALAC-ExCom] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
At 14/07/2009 01:35 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
>Thompson, Darlene wrote:
> > This whole ExComm thing needs to be put out of its misery. If a group
> > of 15 cannot make timely decisions, then the whole structure of ALAC
> > needs to be reconsidered. (as scary as that is)
> >
>It's not the structure that's at fault so much as under-performance by
>ALAC members.
>
>I notice that the new documents include a job description for ALAC
>members which details what's expected of them, but lacks any "or else"
>clauses describing what should happen if those expectations are not met.
>So far in the history of ALAC there has been only one person who has
>left their position because of poor performance, and that happened only
>because of RALO initiative. ALAC, rather than policing itself, has
>chosen the ExecComm as an expedient dodge.
>
>(which reminds me ... it seems to have been quite a while since staff
>produced its last performance chart...)
>
>- Evan
Without commenting on the specifics of the Job Description which I
have not yet studied, perhaps problems such as the one you mention
are the reason that we wanted a few people to quickly look at it
before opening it up to a full committee discussion (imagining that
we ever have such an event).
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Alan Greenberg wrote:
> I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does
> that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with
> and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole
> responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through
> with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to
> happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really want.
> No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct.
The definition of "get rid of the Excom" seems self-evident to me; I
assume you are asking what would replace its current functions.
But you've also asked for some ancillary questions related to
Vice-Chairs etc so I'll offer my vision of it all.
The Chair of ALAC has certain functions. It is reasonable to have a
Vice-Chair in case the Chair is temporarily unable to function. Unless
there are many instances in which both the Chair and Vice-Chair are
unavailable, having more than one Vice-Chair position is redundant.
Anything more than Chair, a single Vice-Chair and a Secretariat is sheer
bloat driven by politics (ie, some kind of equity doctrine) rather than
merit.
These three people ought to have the authority to act in emergency
measures -- that is, when unforeseen deadlines any other circumstances
occur in which the ALAC cannot practically be consulted. However, these
circumstances must be minimized and foreseen when possible, and all such
emergency actions should be reported back to ALAC at the next
opportunity (by email, not then next ALAC meeting) for subsequent action.
Non-emergency matters of ANY kind should not be undertaken by any body
other than ALAC or an open-membership At-Large working group created by
ALAC. Such working groups require at least one ALAC member or RALO
leader as chair/liaison who will report on its activities (and bring
forward resolutions) to ALAC meetings; otherwise membership is open to
any bonafide member of At-Large (an ALS or individual members according
to appropriate regional policies). The working groups are to operate
informally and by rough consensus of all involved.
In the case of the two documents being discussed at the ExecComm
tomorrow, these should both have been drafted by an administrative
(standing) WG, open to participation by anyone in At-Large who is
interest in actively helping. (Who knows? such an Admin WG might have
the same people currently in the ExecCom... but the difference is that
others are welcome to participate *as equals* and not just non-voting
bystanders.) I would envision that the Admin WG would be chaired by the
ALAC Secretary and have the participation of all RALO Secretariats and
anyone else who is interested.
The ALAC Chair should not chair any working group. That position has
enough to do and others must be encouraged to share the load.
Each ALAC member is expected, as a minimum, to be either
- Chair, Vice-Chair or Secretary
- Liaison to an ICANN committee or constituency
- Chair of an At-Large Working Group
RALO chairs and secretariats are also expected to be part of at least
one working group, serving as chairs if no ALAC members are available
(ie, the number of WGs exceeds the number of ALAC members not otherwise
occupied)
These should be part of the job descriptions. Any ALAC member or RALO
leader incapable or unwilling to fulfil such responsibilities should
resign, be recalled, or instructed not to stand for election or nomination.
There. I don't know about succinct by I hope that this vision is clear
enough. You wanted alternatives, here's one.
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Two comments:
At 14/07/2009 07:49 PM, carlos aguirre wrote:
>
>Another Question: Why EX Comm is currently
>formed by Nom Comm appointees, and no by RALO
>representatives?, Nom Comm appointees are better
>user representatives than RALO representatives? I don`t think so.
First, my understanding is that both Cheryl and
Sébastien are elected by their RALOs and are not
NomCom appointees. Second, all four officers
positions were filled by candidates who were not
opposed - two from RALOs, two from NomCom. And if
they had been opposed, whoever was elected would
have been selected by the majority of voters, as
democracy dictates. NomCom appointees are not de
facto better user representatives than RALO
representatives, but perhaps not de facto worse either.
At 14/07/2009 08:19 PM, Andres Piazza wrote:
>About the last part, I don´t think that anyone could disagree with, for
>example, ALAN´s words. But this is not an easy matter to raise. Firstly,
>because some of the analysis are made in quantity matters, but not with a
>complete vision. I share many of the comments but be carefull, who is who to
>be jugdamental to the performance of other ALAC Members?
>
>Specially RALO Leaders! Are we in a position to say something so strongly
>about ALAC Members from our region? The whole RALO elected them, not just
>ourselves. And also, they or some other person could also come with some
>criticism with the role of one of us, RALO leaders. And they could use many
>different criteria to analyze that (for example: "What are RALO Leaders from
>that region that hardly can encourage 1 or 2 ALS rep to be involved in
>remote participation during the meeting?. I put this example because FOR ME,
>in LACRALO, a lot of work is done in private emails, chats, calls, with
>members from the region to encourage, answer doubts, and etc etc, more that
>to be in some particular WG providing what is just my personal opinion). I
>could continue the whole night providing examples, but is not the sense.
>
>I´m not saying that this "performance discussion" shouldn´t be raised, but
>just to be careful and not to put this as an argument against other idea
>that has been displayed.
I guess we may have a different vision here. In
my mind, RALO leaders are elected by their ALSs
to take responsibility for their RALO. That is
what leadership is all about. I agree that this
is potentially a very difficult job. It is not
easy to formally assess performance in cases such
as this, and particularly when the person being
assessed is a colleague. But that is the job that
RALO leaders have been given, and they must use
all of their skills to try to understand how
effective their ALAC representatives are. And
they will no doubt have to talk to other ALAC
members to try to make this assessment. It is
important (in my mind) to differentiate between
someone who is working effectively within the
RALO, and someone who is working well within the
ALAC. You can have one without the other (in both directions).
So should we be careful in both setting up the
rules and then carrying them out? Most certainly!
But ignoring the responsibility should not be one of the options.
Alan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear Alan:
Related to the second comment, I don´t have a different vision than yours in
this.
Regards,
Andrés Piazza
LACRALO Chair
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear all,
I will not try to quote every message that appeared on the list in the past
12 hours.
We should be reminded that 2/3 of the ALAC are *elected* representatives.
If a decision has to be made regarding the removal of some individual from
the ALAC, this should be the decision of the group that has elected
him/her. How this is happening is the RALO's business. It is not up to the
ALAC to set up its own court.
I do challenge the idea that "they should work because their travel is
funded". Expenses reimbursement is not a salary, and ALAC members are not
on ICANN's payroll, ie they are not employees. This funding does not
compensate for unpaid leave, loss of business, either. This being said, I
agree that whoever is willing to apply for a volunteer position needs to
deliver to the best of his/her ability. But this is only a matter of
respect of one's own commitment to the community. What constitutes one's
"best of his/her ability" is highly subjective.
In that respect, I think the job description should clearly indicate what
time commitments and skills are required to some level of detail. For
example, the time schedule of the monthly teleconference call should be
mentioned, so people get not caught up by surprise if this happens in the
middle of their business day.
My perspective regarding performance indicators is that they could provide
an indicator to the ALSes whether or not they should reappoint a
representative to the ALAC. However, it is not the only one. The job
description is another useful input for RALOs. RALO sometimes also elect
people on other criteria like gender or sub-regional balance. In the end,
the "perfect" ALAC member is the one that suits the RALO, not necessarily
one that suits other ALAC members.
Regarding NomCom appointees, I think much of the above applies, too. Any
information the ALAC can input into the NomCom process to help them
nominate the right ALAC member will certainly be much appreciated.
As for the ExCom, I think it is a useful tool for the ALAC to have a bunch
of people who are willing to commit extra time to expedite urgent business
*when needed*. However, a permanent ExCom is not a good idea, especially
because we have monthly meetings. The odds that something urgent happens
between two teleconferences seems rather limited, to me at least.
Patrick
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear all,
I am on my way out and had difficulties to follow all the postings in detail
from today on the issue. But the arguments forwarded by Patrick are
substantial and convincing to me. He didn't say that ALAC has no say if a
regional representative doesn't fulfil the expectations and commitments
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
> We should be reminded that 2/3 of the ALAC are *elected* representatives.
> If a decision has to be made regarding the removal of some individual from
> the ALAC, this should be the decision of the group that has elected
> him/her. How this is happening is the RALO's business. It is not up to the
> ALAC to set up its own court.
>
Patrick's emphatic defence of ALAC unaccountability is duly noted. I
would like to know who else in ALAC believes it has no responsibility to
identify its un-performers.
I'm sure your ALSs want to know.
We should also be reminded that each RALO has elected (and one could
infer recall) authority over 13% of ALAC. For the other 87% over which
they are helpless, they have no choice but to trust that ALAC is taking
reasonable steps to enforce its own job descriptions. Otherwise, why
even bother with job descriptions if they are only "hints" at what
someone should do but may be freely ignored?
I am just as emphatic in the need for ALAC (as a group, not just the sum
of its parts) to be accountable to its sizeable constituency. There
exist various grounds for removal and censure at the ALAC level. We were
recently reminded about consequences of bad language and personal
attack; why should meeting absence or lack of preparation be tolerated
any more than "disrespectful communications"?
In the case of NomComm appointees who underperform, the *only* recourse
open to ALAC is to pressure them into either stepping up or stepping
down (as well as to embarass the NomComm if it sends us lemons). Handled
properly and with appropriate discretion, embarrassments can be
minimized -- after all, the end goal is a better-functioning ALAC, not
the public dressing-down of volunteers. However, there is much to do,
and the core fact remains clear that the ExecComm wouldn't be necessary
if all ALAC members shouldered their fair share of the workload. If a
RALO elects representatives who are personally popular in their region
but are dragging ALAC down by not doing their part, ALAC should be
informing the RALO of this. Doing so is not just a matter of duty to the
global At-Large community, but a service to the other ALAC members who
must pick up the slack of the underperformers.
I agree that ALAC members who are elected by RALOs are ultimately
responsible to their regions. But ALAC also has a responsibility to the
community it is trusted to represent to do the best job that it can, and
that means pushing -- and sometimes pressuring -- its own members just
to serve the function they were chosen to do.
As I complain about the Executive Committee, I note fully that this is
only a symptom. I deeply dislike the tactic but can fully understand the
strategy and appreciate the motivation. I will be first in line to
applaud the work the ExecComm members have done -- the work they have
been forced to do. The two-thirds of ALAC that is not on the ExecComm
ought to really be concerned about the workload that they are allowing
to be placed on that last third.
That ALAC members would argue against its own setting and enforcement of
minimum performance standards should be a concern in the broader
At-Large community. I will do my best to adress this, at least with our
own 13% of ALAC.
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Patrick,
Did you read the job description? Almost everything you were talking
about below IS in the job description (job expectations, time
commitments, etc.). So, why would somebody apply for a job that they
are unable/uncommitted to do?
Also, how are the RALOs supposed to know which of their elected reps are
performing or not? They have NO idea who shows up to which f2f
meetings. They have NO idea if they are attending all of the calls and
managing the WGs, either, without performance evaluations being done in
a timely manner.
If things were run as you suggest, being elected becomes a popularity
contest with no need to actually DO anything!
:)
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Replying to both Evan's and Darlene's e-mails at once:
DT> Did you read the job description?
DT> So, why would somebody apply for a job that they
DT> are unable/uncommitted to do?
Maybe we should discuss the draft job description in another post. To
summarize, I think it under-estimates both the time commitments and the
necessary skills. We need a more detailed document. In my experience,
volunteers are usually over-motivated and too optimistic with regard to
their possible time commitment. Hence my suggestion for a thorough job
description, so they are not taken by surprise.
DT> Also, how are the RALOs supposed to know which of their elected reps
are
DT> performing or not? They have NO idea who shows up to which f2f
DT> meetings. They have NO idea if they are attending all of the calls and
DT> managing the WGs, either, without performance evaluations being done in
DT> a timely manner.
At best, those statistics give a truncated image of the reality. It only
covers quantity, not quality, or ALAC-related work outside the committee.
If I were an ALS that needs to elect a returning ALAC member, I would be
much more interested in what he/she voted in previous polls, to see if I
share his/her opinion. I would check his/her blog posts, tweets, personal
comments to consultations, etc. That seems to me more important that to
know he/she physically present to a specific meeting (but was actually too
jetlagged to contribute).
DT> If things were run as you suggest, being elected becomes a popularity
DT> contest with no need to actually DO anything!
EL> Patrick's emphatic defence of ALAC unaccountability is duly noted.
I though I expressed a more nuanced opinion that what both of you seem to
understand. As I said, if someone accepts a position, he/she is morally
obligated to deliver to the best of his/her ability.
Yes, Darlene, you are right, to a certain extent, this is a popularity
contest. People get elected because the voters think they will do a good
job and represent their opinion. Just like in parliament/congress
elections, there might be representatives that will under-perform. This is
exactly why their term is limited and they need to stand for re-election
every few years.
You may suggest to some people to step down, put pressure on them either
directly or through their RALO. I can agree on this, while noting at the
same time that the proposed statistical criteria do not give the whole
picture. But I would not want to send out a message to the RALOs that their
vote is ultimately not important, because we will have a group of people
who will sovereignly decide who are the bad guys/girls and substitute
themselves for the voters. This seems to me like a negation of the
democratic process we have tried to set up within the At-Large.
I will stop here, because I think the ALAC spends too much time on its
internal processes, when it could actually spend time on policy instead.
Let us get these documents out to the community for review, integrate their
input and have the ALAC vote on it.
Patrick
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Hi again,
the question of accountability is - as Patrick argued - even more complex
depending on levels of representation and accountability -- OR in what
context and capacity you are doing a "job" or mandate (besides popularity,
reputation, status and similar secondary considerations/factors):
- when I was a professional (union or whatsoever functionary) working
with volunteer communities or people, I had a strong and strict
accountability and responsibility towards these people - simply due to
the fact that I was paid for the "job" and they were not.
- there may be a gradual difference between people at different ICANN
constituencies like GAC, GNSO and others -- or whether people attending
ICANN meetings can do this in the context of their regular jobs and during
their working time stating over-time etc. (as usually GAC reps. and other
business reps. do, according to my knowledge at least -- and how Patrick
properly argued).
- the most difficult and sensitive context are the jobs and mandates for
ALAC and RALO functions from volunteers who have no organisation or
structure in the back promoting this work. Even if you have a clear "job
description", obvious expectations, set standards by previous performances
or whatsoever ... on the ALAC and RALO level we have to deal with volunteers
(who are “compensated” for meetings, as Patrick said) but do all the work
during the mandate period normally during their spare time. And that
makes the difference. You cannot measure professionals by the same
standards of performance like volunteers. And therefore we have to discuss
and find *appropriate standards* for time involvement, expectations,
commitments, accountability and responsibility what fits to these people --
if we really want to enlarge, strengthen and to improve the bottom-up
approach at ICANN,
Best,
Wolf
Patrick Vande Walle wrote Thu, 16 Jul 2009 15:25:
>(...)
>At best, those statistics give a truncated image of the reality. It only
>covers quantity, not quality, or ALAC-related work outside the committee.
>If I were an ALS that needs to elect a returning ALAC member, I would be
>much more interested in what he/she voted in previous polls, to see if I
>share his/her opinion. I would check his/her blog posts, tweets, personal
>comments to consultations, etc. That seems to me more important that to
>know he/she physically present to a specific meeting (but was actually too
>jetlagged to contribute).
>
>(...)
>
>Yes, Darlene, you are right, to a certain extent, this is a popularity
>contest. People get elected because the voters think they will do a good
>job and represent their opinion. Just like in parliament/congress
>elections, there might be representatives that will under-perform. This is
>exactly why their term is limited and they need to stand for re-election
>every few years.
>
>You may suggest to some people to step down, put pressure on them either
>directly or through their RALO. I can agree on this, while noting at the
>same time that the proposed statistical criteria do not give the whole
>picture. But I would not want to send out a message to the RALOs that their
>vote is ultimately not important, because we will have a group of people
>who will sovereignly decide who are the bad guys/girls and substitute
>themselves for the voters. This seems to me like a negation of the
>democratic process we have tried to set up within the At-Large.
>
>I will stop here, because I think the ALAC spends too much time on its
>internal processes, when it could actually spend time on policy instead.
>Let us get these documents out to the community for review, integrate their
>input and have the ALAC vote on it.
>
>
>Patrick
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Excellent !!!!! I totally agree.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:21:46 +0200
> From: patrick@vande-walle.eu
> To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
> Dear all,
>
> I will not try to quote every message that appeared on the list in the past
> 12 hours.
>
> We should be reminded that 2/3 of the ALAC are *elected* representatives.
> If a decision has to be made regarding the removal of some individual from
> the ALAC, this should be the decision of the group that has elected
> him/her. How this is happening is the RALO's business. It is not up to the
> ALAC to set up its own court.
>
> I do challenge the idea that "they should work because their travel is
> funded". Expenses reimbursement is not a salary, and ALAC members are not
> on ICANN's payroll, ie they are not employees. This funding does not
> compensate for unpaid leave, loss of business, either. This being said, I
> agree that whoever is willing to apply for a volunteer position needs to
> deliver to the best of his/her ability. But this is only a matter of
> respect of one's own commitment to the community. What constitutes one's
> "best of his/her ability" is highly subjective.
>
> In that respect, I think the job description should clearly indicate what
> time commitments and skills are required to some level of detail. For
> example, the time schedule of the monthly teleconference call should be
> mentioned, so people get not caught up by surprise if this happens in the
> middle of their business day.
>
> My perspective regarding performance indicators is that they could provide
> an indicator to the ALSes whether or not they should reappoint a
> representative to the ALAC. However, it is not the only one. The job
> description is another useful input for RALOs. RALO sometimes also elect
> people on other criteria like gender or sub-regional balance. In the end,
> the "perfect" ALAC member is the one that suits the RALO, not necessarily
> one that suits other ALAC members.
>
> Regarding NomCom appointees, I think much of the above applies, too. Any
> information the ALAC can input into the NomCom process to help them
> nominate the right ALAC member will certainly be much appreciated.
>
> As for the ExCom, I think it is a useful tool for the ALAC to have a bunch
> of people who are willing to commit extra time to expedite urgent business
> *when needed*. However, a permanent ExCom is not a good idea, especially
> because we have monthly meetings. The odds that something urgent happens
> between two teleconferences seems rather limited, to me at least.
>
> Patrick
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Hello All,
AFRALO does not understand the amount of time and energy repeatedly spent on
this issue. AFRALO is asking one question: is it the problem ? All the
other 4 members seem to be ok in the Exec Com. Sorry but I just want to
understand.
Best,
Fatimata
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 1:13 PM, carlos aguirre wrote:
>
> Excellent !!!!! I totally agree.
>
> Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
> abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
>
> *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
>
> www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
>
> http://ar.ageiadensi.org
>
>
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 15 Jul 2009 11:21:46 +0200
> > From: patrick@vande-walle.eu
> > To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> > Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
> >
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I will not try to quote every message that appeared on the list in the
> past
> > 12 hours.
> >
> > We should be reminded that 2/3 of the ALAC are *elected* representatives.
> > If a decision has to be made regarding the removal of some individual
> from
> > the ALAC, this should be the decision of the group that has elected
> > him/her. How this is happening is the RALO's business. It is not up to
> the
> > ALAC to set up its own court.
> >
> > I do challenge the idea that "they should work because their travel is
> > funded". Expenses reimbursement is not a salary, and ALAC members are not
> > on ICANN's payroll, ie they are not employees. This funding does not
> > compensate for unpaid leave, loss of business, either. This being said, I
> > agree that whoever is willing to apply for a volunteer position needs to
> > deliver to the best of his/her ability. But this is only a matter of
> > respect of one's own commitment to the community. What constitutes one's
> > "best of his/her ability" is highly subjective.
> >
> > In that respect, I think the job description should clearly indicate what
> > time commitments and skills are required to some level of detail. For
> > example, the time schedule of the monthly teleconference call should be
> > mentioned, so people get not caught up by surprise if this happens in the
> > middle of their business day.
> >
> > My perspective regarding performance indicators is that they could
> provide
> > an indicator to the ALSes whether or not they should reappoint a
> > representative to the ALAC. However, it is not the only one. The job
> > description is another useful input for RALOs. RALO sometimes also elect
> > people on other criteria like gender or sub-regional balance. In the end,
> > the "perfect" ALAC member is the one that suits the RALO, not necessarily
> > one that suits other ALAC members.
> >
> > Regarding NomCom appointees, I think much of the above applies, too. Any
> > information the ALAC can input into the NomCom process to help them
> > nominate the right ALAC member will certainly be much appreciated.
> >
> > As for the ExCom, I think it is a useful tool for the ALAC to have a
> bunch
> > of people who are willing to commit extra time to expedite urgent
> business
> > *when needed*. However, a permanent ExCom is not a good idea, especially
> > because we have monthly meetings. The odds that something urgent happens
> > between two teleconferences seems rather limited, to me at least.
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > --
> > Blog: http://patrick.vande-walle.eu
> > Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/patrickvw
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ALAC mailing list
> > ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> >
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
> >
> > At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> > ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Disfrutá los mejores videos de MSN mientras chateas
> http://messengertv.msn.com/mkt/es-ar/
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Fatimata Seye Sylla wrote:
> AFRALO does not understand the amount of time and energy repeatedly spent on
> this issue.
First of all, please define "repeatedly". The last sustained (but
unresolved) discussion on this issue was in December.
Second, did AFRALO -- the organization itself -- collectively express
this lack of understanding of the issue? If so, I would be delighted to
participate in your next regional conference call to explain. Please ask
your related staff person to place this issue on the agenda of the
August 5 AFRALO call.
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Thank you Evan. But I don't think you are providing an answer to my
question. I represent AFRALO and have the mandate to ask this question on
their behalf. I don't think I have to give you a justification.
Fatimata
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 7:22 PM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
> Fatimata Seye Sylla wrote:
> > AFRALO does not understand the amount of time and energy repeatedly spent
> on
> > this issue.
> First of all, please define "repeatedly". The last sustained (but
> unresolved) discussion on this issue was in December.
>
> Second, did AFRALO -- the organization itself -- collectively express
> this lack of understanding of the issue? If so, I would be delighted to
> participate in your next regional conference call to explain. Please ask
> your related staff person to place this issue on the agenda of the
> August 5 AFRALO call.
>
> - Evan
>
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Fatimata Seye Sylla wrote:
> Thank you Evan. But I don't think you are providing an answer to my
> question. I represent AFRALO and have the mandate to ask this
> question on their behalf. I don't think I have to give you a
> justification.
OK, then.
The answer to your question is "yes".
- Evan
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Evan. : You can not to say better. I totally agree.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirreabogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 17:40:57 -0400
> From: evan@telly.org
> To: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
> CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
> Alan Greenberg wrote:
>
> > I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does
> > that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with
> > and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole
> > responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through
> > with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to
> > happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really want.
> > No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct.
>
>
> The definition of "get rid of the Excom" seems self-evident to me; I
> assume you are asking what would replace its current functions.
> But you've also asked for some ancillary questions related to
> Vice-Chairs etc so I'll offer my vision of it all.
>
> The Chair of ALAC has certain functions. It is reasonable to have a
> Vice-Chair in case the Chair is temporarily unable to function. Unless
> there are many instances in which both the Chair and Vice-Chair are
> unavailable, having more than one Vice-Chair position is redundant.
> Anything more than Chair, a single Vice-Chair and a Secretariat is sheer
> bloat driven by politics (ie, some kind of equity doctrine) rather than
> merit.
>
> These three people ought to have the authority to act in emergency
> measures -- that is, when unforeseen deadlines any other circumstances
> occur in which the ALAC cannot practically be consulted. However, these
> circumstances must be minimized and foreseen when possible, and all such
> emergency actions should be reported back to ALAC at the next
> opportunity (by email, not then next ALAC meeting) for subsequent action.
>
> Non-emergency matters of ANY kind should not be undertaken by any body
> other than ALAC or an open-membership At-Large working group created by
> ALAC. Such working groups require at least one ALAC member or RALO
> leader as chair/liaison who will report on its activities (and bring
> forward resolutions) to ALAC meetings; otherwise membership is open to
> any bonafide member of At-Large (an ALS or individual members according
> to appropriate regional policies). The working groups are to operate
> informally and by rough consensus of all involved.
>
> In the case of the two documents being discussed at the ExecComm
> tomorrow, these should both have been drafted by an administrative
> (standing) WG, open to participation by anyone in At-Large who is
> interest in actively helping. (Who knows? such an Admin WG might have
> the same people currently in the ExecCom... but the difference is that
> others are welcome to participate *as equals* and not just non-voting
> bystanders.) I would envision that the Admin WG would be chaired by the
> ALAC Secretary and have the participation of all RALO Secretariats and
> anyone else who is interested.
>
> The ALAC Chair should not chair any working group. That position has
> enough to do and others must be encouraged to share the load.
>
> Each ALAC member is expected, as a minimum, to be either
> - Chair, Vice-Chair or Secretary
> - Liaison to an ICANN committee or constituency
> - Chair of an At-Large Working Group
>
> RALO chairs and secretariats are also expected to be part of at least
> one working group, serving as chairs if no ALAC members are available
> (ie, the number of WGs exceeds the number of ALAC members not otherwise
> occupied)
>
> These should be part of the job descriptions. Any ALAC member or RALO
> leader incapable or unwilling to fulfil such responsibilities should
> resign, be recalled, or instructed not to stand for election or nomination.
>
> There. I don't know about succinct by I hope that this vision is clear
> enough. You wanted alternatives, here's one.
>
> - Evan
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
_________________________________________________________________
Gratis Internet Explorer 8 optimizado para MSN
http://www.ie8.msn.com/microsoft/internet-explorer-8/es-ar/ie8.aspx
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Hey Alan,
I was trying to be helpful - thank you SO much for your encouraging
words.
See my next e-mail for succinctness that you obviously found lacking in
this one.
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Darlene, I was actually trying to be helpful, although apparently not
successfully. My request for further clarification was not targeted
at you specifically, but asking all who were calling for the ExCom to
disappear to explain what they meant, because I truly do not
understand what they want instead.
Again, if you felt my comments were inappropriate, I regret having made them.
Alan
At 14/07/2009 05:05 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
>Hey Alan,
>
>I was trying to be helpful - thank you SO much for your encouraging
>words.
>
>See my next e-mail for succinctness that you obviously found lacking in
>this one.
>
>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
>
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
OK,
I just took the time to read a couple of the documents that will be
discussed at the next ExComm meeting and have the following comments and
encourage others to weigh in here (and READ some of the documents!).
1. It was never my intention to "put down" those individual members of
the ExComm. What we have in the ExComm is a truly motivated bunch of
people that keeps everything going with ALAC. Were they to disappear
from the face of the earth, ALAC would be non-functional.
2. The Position Description for ALAC Members and ALAC Liaisons states,
under Time Commitment and Working Practice, that minimum participation
includes (among other things):
* Participate actively in policy issues and other working groups.
Each ALAC member is expected to help lead at least one working group
composed of members of At-Large working on policy issues. A current
listing of working group and the remit of each may be found at
http://st.icann.org/working-groups.
* Reading and commenting in At-Large's mailing lists and other
communications media.
The participation in WGs includes: Additionally, each ALAC member
leads, co-leads, or participates in one or more working groups on policy
issues, which will involve an additional average 10 hours per month in
reading documents, drafting proposed responses, and attending
teleconferences and participating in email and other electronic
correspondence related to those working groups.
OK, so in addition to having parameters set on numbers of meetings
attended and votes acted on, we also have the above. Could the
performance metrics that we get from staff not also include:
- How many policy statements have each ALAC member drafted or
participated in drafting?
- Haw many WGs have they chaired or have given substantive input into?
- Attendance at face to face meetings
Frankly, I, too, have witnessed the trends of:
- In Sydney, some ALAC members that swanned in late to meetings, missed
ALAC meetings and left early. During the rest of the sessions, these
ones were completely missing and did not attend. Great Facebook pages
on what they ACTUALLY did there, though!
- ALAC members who we NEVER hear from between the face to face meetings.
They don't bring any kind of policy work to the table and hardly any
comments on list (and WGs??? - never)
3. Unfortunately, the regions don't see this lack of effort at the face
to face meetings and may not be tuned into the other things that I have
brought up. These NEED to be included in performance indicators.
4. Check out the voting procedures for the new Board Liaison. I
heavily support the new means that are being suggested to actively bring
in the RALOs into this decision rather than leaving it all up to ALAC.
Hey, people, our ALAC reps are supposed to be bringing forward the
opinions of the RALOs and, as some are not, this is the way we have
direct influence.
5. In Cairo, Cheryl really tried to address some of these issues but
got slammed from someone from North America who is no longer with us. I
would like that whole thing dusted off and implemented.
So, while I am totally against this whole ExComm thing, perhaps we need
to really do some serious spring cleaning so that we can ENABLE a strong
ALAC.
Just my two cents (after about two hours of reading).
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
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
I am in total agreement with Darlene regarding the comments related to
performance. We really need to have people helping the work to be done
seriously. I do believe the bylaws structure works with the vice chairs +
rapporteur and to have WG is the best way to have people participating.
Problems start when members do not commit enough to bring opinions,
suggestions, votes etc and lots of docs to be draft will not be posted in
ALAC's name. As used to happen in the past.
Excomm is, in my opinion, just a name and as Nick explained, the meetings
are open and anyone can participate, as well as the agenda. The only issue
is that it demands a lot from members, but I am open to have anyone
committed with ALAC to participate, read all a papers before the meeting and
bring their ideas and hard work to help.
I could understand the energy against Excomm if Excomm was closed , with a
secrecy agenda, but open, it is just another working group executing the
activities described in our bylaws.
You may complain that we push a little out of bylaws, when calling AFrica
representative to join the chair, Vice chairs and rapporteur ,( acting as
another vice chair) but it was just a matter of have a balance among
regions, while we do not have a new geographic division in ICANN and may
need to change our bylaws to better adapt to the new geographic framework.
Again, the chair cannot work alone, we, as vice chair + rapporteur, we
debate almost every day, including Saturdays and Sundays, we will continue
to do so, independently of the name.
Next call will be tomorrow 21 UTC, get the agenda and please join!
Best to all
Vanda Scartezini
POLO Consultores Associados
& IT Trend
Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
Mob + 5511 8181.1464
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear Alan.
As I said, when talking with you, in Sidney.
In relation with performance guidelines, I believe is neccesary to make a new rule (maybe a rule 21 bis) where we say the less as possible, because everybody knows what are his/her obligations.
and make a new rule with a clear process.
I insist with my work presented in Paris, and perhaps a previous step of dialogue with the "member in fault" .-
Carlos Dionisio Aguirreabogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:24:01 -0400
> To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> From: alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
> The issue of performance guidelines, which based on discussions prior
> to and in Sydney led to the clear need for a Job Description, all
> falls on my plate.
>
> Knowing that I would be rather busy with other matters for a few
> weeks after Sydney, and that Cheryl would be out of commission for a
> while, we asked staff to do the first draft of a job description. You
> alluded to the last performance paper that crashed and burnt - I most
> definitely did not want that to happen to this new document, so it
> seemed wise for someone other than staff to look at it before opening
> full comments. THAT is why it was on the agenda. How would you have
> done it differently?
>
> I really would like someone to define "get rid of the ExCom". Does
> that mean you don't want Vice-Chairs. Or don't want them working with
> and talking to the Chair. Do you want the Chair to have sole
> responsibility for Chair matters, rather than talking things through
> with a representative of each region. Or do you want all of that to
> happen, but just not have the title ExCom. What is it you really
> want. No buzzwords - please be clear and succinct.
>
> Alan
>
> At 14/07/2009 03:22 PM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
> >Wow!
> >
> >Yes, I have to agree with this and I can certainly understand your
> >exasperation, Alan. I *do* care about ALAC and At-Large. So, what can
> >I do to change things? I'm not on the ALAC so am rather looking in from
> >the outside.
> >
> >However, as soon as the whole ExComm thing came up, there was
> >substantial push-back on it that seemed to me to be ignored.
> >
> >Please, if ALAC people think that they "deserve" travel funding, then
> >they also should be "required" to participate. I can say this as being
> >from the only region that has required our ALAC reps to perform and has
> >cleaned house at least once.
> >
> >We need to strengthen those job descriptions (as Evan mentioned) to also
> >have an "or else" clause. Also, yes, we definitely need to see those
> >performance indicators at regular intervals (not just for ALAC but also
> >for the Chairs and Secretariats). However, the numbers often just don't
> >show what Alan is mentioning. If any ALAC member asks for input and
> >comments and is only responded to by the same people, that is more of a
> >judgment call (not shown in the numbers) but this somehow needs to be
> >reported back to the regions (I'm not sure how). There was talk around
> >ALAC to incorporate various performance indicators back in Cairo but for
> >reasons that I will keep off-list, it crashed and burned. We need to go
> >back to this, strengthen our ALAC, get rid of the chaff that is not
> >performing and get rid of the ExComm.
> >
> >I hate the thought of the Chairs and Secretariats being the ex-officio
> >"police" for this sort of thing but the regions really do need to weigh
> >in here as well as the ALAC itself. Again, I'm not sure how this should
> >be done but something needs to change.
> >
> >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
> >
> >
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear Vanda.
If you say:
"I could understand the energy against Excomm if Excomm was closed , with a
secrecy agenda, but open, it is just another working group executing the
activities described in our bylaws."
I wonder
why is the motivation to support an Ex Comm?, why not a WG where all ALAC members can participate in equal conditions?
On the other side: Whole ALAC, is an Ex Comm of the At Large Community, why an EX Comm inside to another Ex Comm ? what is the idea, more than solve urgent cases (which could be solved by Chair or Vice Chair) ? .
Another Question: Why EX Comm is currently formed by Nom Comm appointees, and no by RALO representatives?, Nom Comm appointees are better user representatives than RALO representatives? I don`t think so.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> From: vanda@uol.com.br
> To: DThompson@GOV.NU.CA; alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 19:26:14 -0300
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
> I am in total agreement with Darlene regarding the comments related to
> performance. We really need to have people helping the work to be done
> seriously. I do believe the bylaws structure works with the vice chairs +
> rapporteur and to have WG is the best way to have people participating.
> Problems start when members do not commit enough to bring opinions,
> suggestions, votes etc and lots of docs to be draft will not be posted in
> ALAC's name. As used to happen in the past.
>
> Excomm is, in my opinion, just a name and as Nick explained, the meetings
> are open and anyone can participate, as well as the agenda. The only issue
> is that it demands a lot from members, but I am open to have anyone
> committed with ALAC to participate, read all a papers before the meeting and
> bring their ideas and hard work to help.
> > You may complain that we push a little out of bylaws, when calling AFrica
> representative to join the chair, Vice chairs and rapporteur ,( acting as
> another vice chair) but it was just a matter of have a balance among
> regions, while we do not have a new geographic division in ICANN and may
> need to change our bylaws to better adapt to the new geographic framework.
> Again, the chair cannot work alone, we, as vice chair + rapporteur, we
> debate almost every day, including Saturdays and Sundays, we will continue
> to do so, independently of the name.
> Next call will be tomorrow 21 UTC, get the agenda and please join!
> Best to all
>
>
> Vanda Scartezini
> POLO Consultores Associados
> & IT Trend
> Alameda Santos 1470 cjs 1407/8
> 01418-903 Sao Paulo,SP.
> Fone + 55 11 3266.6253
> Mob + 5511 8181.1464
>
>
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Dear Evan: A lot of time before the events happened, I said this . The "de facto" Ex Comm is much more dangerous than the inactivity. Ex Comm have to work only when the situations need a fast solution, not in other moments. ALAC is a body; Not two differents things, where we have a select group of illuminated, and other which see the train pass only. When I said my possition against the creation of Ex Comm, I was talking about that. And unfortunatly I had reason.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
www.derechoytecnologia.com.ar
http://ar.ageiadensi.org
> Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2009 11:34:46 -0400
> From: evan@telly.org
> To: staff@atlarge.icann.org
> CC: alac-excom@atlarge-lists.icann.org; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> Subject: Re: [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
>
>
> https://st.icann.org/alac-excomm/index.cgi?15_july_2009
>
> Once upon a time the rationale given for the existence of the Executive
> Committee was that occasionally ALAC was required to move faster than
> was, and that a small group of five could handle issues of critical
> timeliness more easily than the whole group of 15.
>
> Fair enough.
>
> In December mailing list discussions it was revealed that the ExecComm
> was going to take on certain additional administrative functions that
> could (and should) have just as easily been delegated to a conventional
> working group.
>
> Under any situation of normalcy, there would be an ALAC administrative
> working group, open to all interested people just like all other working
> groups are right now. Just like topic-driven WGs draft policy
> recommendations (to be approved by At-Large), so too would a admin WG
> draft propose changes to matters of internal operation. It would have an
> ALAC liaision who would raise its issues to the whole group.
>
> Instead we have a self-selected group, that (unlike any other WG or
> subcommittee) shuts out non-ALAC members.
>
> Such a closed culture leads to undesirable outcomes, such as the wording
> of the agenda item regarding two draft documents regarding ALAC job
> descriptions and the method to select the ALAC Board Liaison:
> /
> "Decision Required: Whether or not these items shall be proposed to the
> full ALAC (as amended if required)"/
>
> Such wording infers that the option exists to NOT bring these issues to
> ALAC. I can only dream about whether or when the opportunity to debate
> such issues will trickle down to the RALOs and ALSs.
>
> The non-emergency operation of the Executive Committee continues to
> serve as prima facie evidence of deep ALAC dysfunction, a continued
> effort to shut out non-ALAC participation in important matters while so
> much of ALAC is not pulling its weight. I propose that the non-emergency
> functions of the ExecComm be immediately revoked and charged to a
> conventional ALAC Administrative Working Group (that would be chaired by
> the ALAC Secretary, and involve participation by RALO secretariats and
> anyone else from At-Large who is interested).
>
> - Evan
>
> PS: I also ask that links to the existing ALAC Working Groups be listed
> at http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/ Right now they're almost impossible
> to find by a casual user (http://www.atlarge.icann.org/en/issues is
> badly organized, non-intuitively named, and not pointed to from the main
> ALAC web page). Come to think of it, the who At-Large corner of the
> ICANN website needs an overhaul, but that's a different issue.
>
> _______________________________________________
> ALAC mailing list
> ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
>
> At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
> ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
_________________________________________________________________
Disfrutá los mejores videos de MSN mientras chateas
http://messengertv.msn.com/mkt/es-ar/
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
ALAC Working Wiki: http://st.icann.org/alac
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
I agreed with Carlos then and still do it now
José Ovidio Salgueiro A.
salgueiro.jo@gmail.com
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
I agreed with Carlos then and still do it now
José Ovidio Salgueiro A.
salgueiro.jo@gmail.com
[ALAC-ExCom] [ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th
Evan, Carlos,
Once Again, I´m with you on this. Couldn´t add a word to your statement.
Regards,
Andrés Piazza
LACRALO Chair
[ALAC] Draft Agenda for ALAC ExCom meeting of 15th July
Evan, Carlos,
Once Again, I´m with you on this. Couldn´t add a word to your statement.
Regards,
Andrés Piazza
LACRALO Chair