Re: Fw: [atlarge-discuss] ALOC Draft 3.0

[Erick Iriarte Ahon <faia@amauta.rcp.net.pe>]

Hi Denise
and hi to all

Maybe i loss something. the ALOC Draft 3.0 is or not a "official" document?

I think is only a draft document, and the only person who send the "real" 
document is you?

I'm agree with somethings in the ALOC Draft 3.0 document, and i send 
comments (in a past email), but i want to know, which is the person who 
send the "official" document?

Thanks.

Erick Iriarte Ahon
Latinoamericann Project
http://latinoamericann.derecho.org.ar



At 03:07 p.m. 25/07/2002 -0700, Denise Michel ALSC wrote:
>I must correct your inaccuracies, Hans.
>
>I am, along with the other members of the ERC "assistance group,"
>responsible for crafting a substantive draft ALAC proposal.
>
>"Version 3.0" is *not* "a team product of the ALOC" and does *not*
>"represent the consensus of the ALOC."
>
>   -  I wrote the outline as a starting point for discussion;
>   -  an overwhelming majority of ALOC members have not commented on the
>text, let alone "approved" it;
>   -  I expressed my disapproval to your additions;
>   -  the text simply represents a starting point for discussions to which a
>majority of assistance group members have not yet had a chance to contribute
>on ALAC issues.
>
>The assistance group is not "replacing the ALOC as the voice of the user" as
>you melodramatically suggested.  It's a temporary group that will draft a
>proposal for an ALAC for ERC/public consideration.
>
>Denise
>
>Denise Michel
>coordinator@at-large.org
>
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Hans Klein" <hans.klein@pubpolicy.gatech.edu>
>To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
>Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 10:49 AM
>Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] ALOC Draft 3.0
>
>
>
>Denise works with us to facilitate our processes.  Substantive work is the
>responsibility of the ALOC members.
>
>Version 3.0 is a team product of the ALOC and enjoys the support of
>numerous ALOC members.  Indeed, I don't recall any expressions of
>disapproval. I believe it represents the consensus of the ALOC.
>
>If I interpret Denise's comments correctly, the newly created "ERC
>assistance group" (from which Sotiris Sotiropoulos and I were excluded)
>will soon replace the ALOC as the "voice of the user."  Sigh!
>
>Hans
>
>
>
>At 09:34 AM 7/25/2002 -0700, Denise Michel ALSC wrote:
> >This is *not* the "latest version" or "Version 3.0" or a "Proposed Final
> >Draft" of the "At-Large Organizing Committee (ALOC)
> >Submission to the..ERC..On the Design of An At Large Advisory Committee
> >(ALAC)."  Hans Klein added these titles, along with a "Preamble" and "Part
> >I" to an *outline of approaches/issues* that needed to be considered by
> >the ERC's "assistance group" in order to draft implementation details for
> >an ALAC.  Any ideas this list's participants have on how to structure an
> >ALAC, of course, are welcome.  However, the point of this limited ERC
> >assistance group is to quickly provide *detailed recommendations* on an
> >ALAC for public (your) consideration.
> >
> >Hans may wish to slap some rhetoric on an outline and call it a potential
> >implementation plan, but that does not make it so. When the assistance
> >group issues its submission to the ERC, it will be a detailed proposal for
> >establishing an ALAC on which anyone interested can comment, change, build
> >upon.  It will not be, nor is it intended to be, a reflection of the views
> >of all ALOC member organizations or even all of the ALOC members
>themselves.
> >
> >Denise
> >
> >Denise Michel
> >coordinator@at-large.org
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Sotiris Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
> >Cc: "discuss" <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> >Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 4:37 AM
> >Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] ALOC Draft 3.0
> >
> >
> >Hans Klein wrote:
> >
> > > Sotiris,
> > >
> > > The draft that you posted is out of date, I believe.  There have been
>three
> > > revisions since then (2.0, 2.1, 3.0).
> > >
> > > The biggest change was to add a "Part I" that restates the ALAC's
>support
> > > for election of At Large directors.
> >
> >Hans,
> >
> >Thanks for the heads up!  Apologies to all.  Below is the latest version.
> >Comments are welcome and will be submitted.
> >
> >------
> >VERSION 3.0 (Proposed Final Draft)
> >
> >At-Large Organizing Committee (ALOC)
> >Submission to the ICANN Evolution & Reform Committee On the Design of An At
> >Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)
> >
> >25 July 2002
> >
> >
> >
> >PREAMBLE
> >
> >The At Large Organizing Committee (ALOC) was set up by ICANN to guide and
> >encourage bottom-up efforts to organize At-Large mechanisms for meaningful,
> >informed participation in ICANN.  The membership list of the ALOC can be
>seen
> >at: http://www.at-large.org/at-large-members.htm
> >
> >This interim report offers recommendations on the organization of an At
>Large
> >Advisory Committee (ALAC).
> >
> >The ALOC finds itself faced with an inherent contradiction, and therefore
>the
> >ALOC comments are organized in two parts.  On the one hand, the ALOC offers
> >comments on how to implement certain features of the Evolution and Reform
> >Committee's Blueprint for ICANN reform.   However, the ALOC does not
>support
> >all portions of that Blueprint, especially the elimination of the elected
>At
> >Large directors.  There is widespread support in the ICANN community for
> >elected At Large Directors.  Pending final resolution of the election
>issue,
> >however, the ALOC offers advice on what the Evolution and Reform Committee
> >should do and how it should operate
> >within ICANN now.
> >
> >With ICANN's authority over the DNS up for review and renewal in September
> >2002, we hope that a way can be found to preserve the representation of
>users.
> >User representation will ensure a foundation of legitimacy for ICANN to
>enable
> >it to survive and prosper as an institution.
> >
> >We urge the ERC and ICANN to proceed on these issues along a timetable that
> >permits sufficient time for the At-Large Structures within ALOC to engage
>in
> >genuine deliberation with their constituencies on these important issues.
> >
> >
> >
> >PART I
> >SUPPORT FOR THE TERMS OF INTERNET PRIVATIZATION
> >
> >The At Large Organizing Committee (ALOC) supports the original terms of
> >Internet privatization, most notably the principle of balanced
>representation
> >of users and industry experts on the ICANN board.  The ALOC also supports
>the
> >implementation mechanisms developed for At Large users, most notably the
> >direct
> >elections of directors.
> >
> >This support has been articulated in numerous documents, including:
> >? Esther Dyson's letter of 6 November 1998 to the US Dept. of Commerce on
> >behalf of the ICANN board.  That letter noted that the ICANN Board has an
> >unconditional mandate to create a membership structure that will elect nine
>At
> >Large Directors.   (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/press/ICANN111098.htm)
> >? The NGO and Academic ICANN Study, which concluded that ICANN should
>retain
> >balanced representation of users and industry experts on its board and
>should
> >continue to employ global elections. (http://www.naisproject.org/)
> >? ICANN's At Large Study Commission, which found that ICANN's policies
>affect
> >users and that users should be elected to the ICANN board.
> >(http://www.atlargestudy.org/)
> >
> >The ALOC therefore prefers that ICANN not implement the recommendations in
>the
> >ERC Blueprint and instead work to implement the conditions of
>privatization.
> >Only an ICANN whose legitimacy is beyond dispute can work in the long run.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >PART II
> >WORKING WITHIN THE ERC BLUEPRINT
> >
> >Whether the ERC blueprint will be the basis for a new ICANN will not be
>known
> >before the end of this year.  Despite the reservations about that
> >Blueprint, we
> >offer here some suggestions about how its terms might be implemented.
> >
> >1. Background
> >a. Need for At-Large: ICANN needs a mechanism for individual users'
> >participation in ICANN.  This provides a formalized role in the policy
> >development process for users that ensures that user views are seriously
>taken
> >into account.
> >2. Role and Responsibilities
> >a. ALAC is a standing advisory committee of the Board
> >b. Provides advice and guidance to the Board and to other organizations
>within
> >ICANN on the needs of, and the impact of proposed policies on, the
>Internet's
> >individual users ­ addressing pending issues and introducing new issues
> >relevant to Internet issues and within ICANN's purview.
> >c. Serves both as a resource for ICANN to pursue specific issues/questions
>and
> >solicit user information, and as a meeting point for individual Internet
>users
> >and their organizations.
> >d. All ICANN policy-making entities will provide ALAC with appropriate
>notice
> >of upcoming and pending policy discussions and impending policy decisions
>to
> >ensure adequate opportunity for At-Large input
> >e. Through At-Large Structures, ALAC will engage in outreach to, and
>education
> >of, individual Internet users about ICANN/ICANN issues and will involve
>users
> >and their representatives in decision making, aggregation of
> >views, and identification of relevant Internet user priorities
> >f. ALAC will work with other ICANN stakeholders to address issues and
>develop
> >positions on relevant issues
> >g. ALAC will use on-line mechanisms as focal points for discussions and
> >information dissemination, ensuring broad public access to ALAC activities
> >h.
> >3. Structure/Membership
> >a. Should be structured so as to:
> >i. Provide effective, broadly inclusive mechanism for involving and
> >representing individual Internet users in ICANN's policy and
>decision-making
> >activities
> >ii. Demonstrate that the organizations of which the ALAC is composed
>actually
> >do represent the populations they claim to represent.
> >iii. Have membership that is geographically diverse, and is selected
>through a
> >process which includes each At-Large Structure (group) that meets specified
> >criteria.
> >4. Involvement w/ Board, other entities
> >a. ALAC should have a liaison seat on the ICANN Board
> >b. It should have liaisons to other ICANN policy-making bodies as
>appropriate
> >[To be defined.]
> >c. Appointment of four delegates to the Nominating Committee
> >5. "At-Large Structures" Criteria ­ new or existing organizations that:
> >a. Are open, participatory, and self-sustaining
> >b. Engage in outreach to, and education of, individual Internet users about
> >ICANN and ICANN issues
> >c. Involve individual Internet users in policy and decision-making and
> >activities related to involvement in ICANN, including soliciting opinions
>of
> >their members and having participatory mechanisms for the discussion and/or
> >development of policies, aggregating views, and identifying relevant
>Internet
> >user priorities concerning ICANN
> >d. Maintain transparent and publicly accessible processes for input, policy
> >development, and decision-making
> >e. Post current information about the organization's aims, structure,
> >membership, working mechanisms and current leadership
> >f. Are open for new individual members
> >g. Are able to maintain themselves without requiring funding from ICANN
> >h. Are able to guarantee and demonstrate the real identity of their
> >members and
> >to provide the relevant anagraphical data in electronic form.
> >6. At-Large Structure Designation/Development
> >a. ICANN should post and distribute a call for At-Large Structures,
>providing
> >organizations with an appropriate period of time apply to be eligible to
> >participate in the initial ALAC.
> >b. Organizations fulfilling the criteria can apply to become At-Large
> >Structures at any time and participate in the ALAC as appropriate
>(immediately
> >or during next selection cycle depending on process).
> >c. It will be the ALAC's responsibility:
> >i. to alter or update the admission criteria for new Structures;
> >ii. to exclude from itself any Structure which, after appropriate
> >verification,
> >fails to meet the current criteria;
> >iii. to state whether any prospective Structure meets the criteria and
> >thus can
> >be accepted in the process. Deliberations of type i) and ii) require a
> >majority
> >vote of 2/3 of the ALAC.
> >d. At Large Structures will not be required to fund ICANN or the costs of
>the
> >ALAC, even if partially.
> >
> >7. ALAC Composition (options)
> >a. (Variable membership) One member from each At-Large Structure
> >b. (Fixed membership) Fixed number from each region (ICANN has
>traditionally
> >addressed geographic diversity based on five regions of the world) (the
> >"Alexander plan")
> >c. Fixed membership, half appointed and half elected.
> >8. ALAC Funding and Staffing ALAC (options)
> >a. The ALAC could be funded either by its members, by ICANN, or by some
> >combination of the two.
> >
> >###
> >
> >
> >2
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> >For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-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
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
>For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-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