[atlarge-discuss] FW: [atlarge-panel] 1st Teleconference - Minutes - addendum

[Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>]

FYI
> Please note that these minutes are being released in the public
> interest to reflect principles of openness and transparency of
> the new organization. They have not been reviewed in advance by
> all participating Members and may contain errors and omissions.
> Please treat them accordingly as Preliminary.

> > 1st Teleconference August 20, 2002
> >
> > PARTICIPANTS:
> > Y.J. Park, Richard Henderson, Joanna Lane, Vivek Durai (part), Vittorio
> > Bertola (part).
> >
> > Thanks expressed to YJ for organizing the conference.
> >
> > DISCUSSION ON WORKING METHODOLOGY
> >
> > TELECONFERENCING
> >
> > YJ said the purpose of the meeting was mainly to get to know each other
> > better and find ways to work through issues faster. It was clear that we
> > were restricted over decision-making and would focus on constructive
> > discussion instead.
> >
> > JOANNA said she favored voting online over teleconference votes,
> > because it
> > is more open and transparent and Teleconferences represent a barrier to
> > entry for some Panelists.
> >
> > VIVEK noted that teleconferences are too expensive, hence his
> connectivity
> > during this meeting would be brief and he requested he be
> allowed to make
> > his comments on the various agenda items out of order. It was
> acknowledged
> > that some Panelists may never participate, and RICHARD expressed concern
> > that students or anyone with limited means might feel excluded,
> as well as
> > raising JFC's objections.
> >
> > YJ noted that Bret Fausett had offered to provide an MP3 of future
> > teleconferences, but had a conflicting appointment on this
> occasion. This
> > offer was much appreciated.
> >
> > IP TELEPHONY & VOTING
> >
> > VIVEK advised flexibility in methodology, suggesting that we explore a
> > variety of ways to meet the need for balancing transparency and
> > efficiency,
> > including the use of IP telephony, which is a more cost effective method
> > than teleconferencing. He suggested we consider
> > http://www.unchat.com which
> > has been developed by a friend of his and offers features that would be
> > useful, including voting arrangements, and can accommodate up to
> > 20 people.
> > Also other interfaces, such as Jefsey's wiki. Comments invited.
> >
> > YJP expressed her interest in using teleconferencing and the need to
> > consider funding to support some people if this was to be used
> as a device
> > in the future.
> >
> > JOANNA suggested we could also use the Poll feature at the website, but
> > since the Organization Member list and Forum list do not
> correspond, this
> > raised an ID verification issue that needs further discussion.
> >
> > VITTORIO said the main issue we had to deal with was one of
> > credibility. We
> > must convince people that we are credible. Working methodology
> impacts our
> > credibility.
> >
> > DISCUSSION ON ORGANIZATION NAME
> >
> > A general discussion took place about how best to progress this
> matter and
> > the conclusion reached was to seek and hopefully obtain consent from the
> > whole Panel for:-
> >
> > 1) The Panel to send a notice to the Discuss List (and
> > news@icannatlarge.com? )inviting official submissions from the
> membership,
> > making clear that people who've sent in a name before must repeat the
> > process if they want it to be considered alongside those already
> > short-listed by the Panel. To be acceptable, the domain name
> must meet the
> > criteria that it is already registered
> > to a member who is willing and able to transfer the name to the
> > organization
> > for free should it be adopted in due course. Unregistered names
> are not an
> > option because they may not be available later.
> >
> > Time-line: 3 days.
> >
> > 2)The Panel then to submit to a vote of the membership its short list of
> > prospective names (following confirmation from JFC, Sotiris and
> > Judith that
> > transfer can be effected free and clear with respect to
> ICANNATLarge.org,
> > WorldAtLarge.org and InternetAtLarge.org respectively) together
> > with any new
> > candidate names. One Vote per member. Open Vote, with ballots
> returned to
> > Discuss-List, or suitable sub-list if one can be secured.
> >
> > Time-line: 7 days
> >
> > It was agreed to defer the issue of whether or not the organization name
> > included the TLD for further discussion.
> >
> > Time-Line: 7 days
> >
> > COMMENTS ON DNSO ICANN BOARD ELECTION
> >
> > VITTORIO said there were advantages in having At Large
> Candidates raising
> > the profile of our Organization and that it is important for members to
> > endorse those who agree to stand for election. A minimum of 10
> > endorsements
> > is required for Nominees to qualify as Candidates.
> >
> > JOANNA commented that the name issue ought to be resolved prior to
> > candidates commencing their election campaigns.
> >
> > COMMENTS ON ALAC
> >
> > The ALAC published a new document about 3 hours before the
> Teleconference.
> > Vittorio summarized its contents and highlighted one aspect -
> Regional At
> > Large Organizations.
> >
> > The members present had not had time to study the document in
> > detail, but it
> > was noted that the ERC-appointed Assistance Group had called for
> > "INDEPENDENT regional @large organisations - SELF-CREATED by the @large
> > communities". It is proposed that these regional organisations
> would send
> > representatives to participate in ALAC. Discussion followed on what the
> > status of our own regional groups would be in this construct. It was
> > generally agreed that we should just focus on our own groups and see how
> > things evolved.
> >
> > Members needed more time to study the most recent document in
> > closer detail
> > and this issue would obviously be addressed as a priority in WG-ICANN.
> >
> > WORKING GROUPS & MAILING LISTS
> >
> > General comments: Lack of mailing lists is blocking progress on
> launching
> > WG's. YJ said it was important to isolate At Large Secretariat functions
> > from ICANN, and that mailing list and website ought to be kept together.
> >
> > There was agreement that excessive overload of mail from so
> many WGs might
> > flood the discuss-list and frighten away marginal members, and that
> > therefore use of the discuss-list was not a good option.
> >
> > Proposed Action: Ask Thomas Roessler directly if he is amenable
> to hosting
> > additional sub-lists. Also talk to DNSO NonCom Constituency
> List host, and
> > issue a further call on the discuss list. Explore possibilities with
> > Elisabeth regarding Secretariat support for At Large. RICHARD
> > insisted there
> > must be no dependency on ICANN for any of these functions.
> >
> >
> > WG-OUTREACH:
> >
> > Richard outlined possible priorities for the initial phase as follows:
> >
> > 1. Organisation name - being addressed
> >
> > 2. The need to be pro-active in contacting possible co-ordinators in
> > different regions and different countries. Richard felt
> individuals should
> > be contacted and personally encouraged to organise and
> > participate. The need
> > was to find volunteers to co-ordinate at regional, national or
> > local level. This de-centralisation needed a proactive approach,
> > and Richard
> > requested access to membership e-mail addresses, or a process for
> > communicating with specific members in a certain country.
> JOANNA suggested
> > this raised privacy issues, and thought the necessary support
> from members
> > might be raised via regular Announce newsletters which are already under
> > discussion with HANS. Richard said this was helpful but not enough.
> >
> > 3. New members needed a Web presence and point of contact
> online. This is
> > ongoing.
> >
> > 4. Initial publicity materials should be generated once we have
> > agreed on a
> > name. Translation where possible. And we should pool resources
> to collect
> > press-contact lists or this could be done locally.
> >
> > Further to these initial priorities, RICHARD also raised the issue of
> > membership fees. He preferred the concept of voluntary contributions, to
> > remove the payment barrier which might reduce overall recruitment.
> >
> >
> > WG-INCORPORATION and FUNDING
> >
> > General discussion on Incorporation, Funding and the obvious need for
> > financing the organisation, to be developed further by relevant WGs.
> >
> > JOANNA commented that she is already getting drawn into this
> work and has
> > recently been contacted offlist by a member of At Large who is also an
> > expert in international non-profits, offering to assist with the set up.
> > There is also the issue of the InternetNZ US$1,000 donation that
> > needs to be
> > resolved quickly at Sue Leader's request. It was reported that
> > Member Walter
> > Schmidt, CPA, has reviewed this situation from a tax perspective
> > and advises
> > operating under the simple principle of donations being made to the
> > organization and then the organization paying its contributors.
> This means
> > InternetNZ will not be paying Joop's invoice direct, which places a high
> > priority on obtaining a bank account, or appointing a trustee
> as per Bret
> > Fausett's recent suggestion, which may be the best temporary solution.
> >
> > WG-WEB
> >
> > There was some discussion about identifying another webmaster. Sotiris
> > Sotiropoulos has kindly volunteered his services and other members have
> > volunteered by posting in the forum. Joop wished to relinquish
> > this post by
> > 30th August. The Panel could consider appointing Sotiris as a
> > second interim
> > Webmaster, which would allow a little more time for this WG to
> > work through
> > a more formal selection procedure so that all offers could be
> given proper
> > consideration in due course.
> >
> > ________________________________________________________
> >
> > Written by Joanna Lane and Richard Henderson
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-panel-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-panel-help@lists.fitug.de
> >


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de