Re: [ICANN-EU] Organizing the ICANN Membership: Intermediate Institutions

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Hans and all,

  Well you left out some very important facts Hans!  For instance,
most of the AT-Large members do not yet have PIN # so they
cannot vote....

  More to come later on this "Report"...

Hans Klein wrote:

> Dear Members of ICANN-EU,
>
> Thank you for engaging in a most enlightening discussion!
>
> This is a draft version of the next issue of Cyber-Federalist.  It deals
> with issues that have been discussed on this list.
>
> I will revise this and post it tomorrow (Tuesday). I welcome any comments!
>
> Thank you.
>
> Hans Klein
>
> ===========================================
>
> Organizing the ICANN Membership: Intermediate Institutions
>
> Last week the At Large membership activation ended, with the final member
> count at 76,504.  Beginning on October 1 those 76,504 members will elect 5
> At Large Directors.
>
> How will this membership function?  How will 76,504 voters connect with 5
> Directors?  Even as our attention now turns to the October elections, it is
> important to think of the long-term organization of the At Large Membership.
>
> In this essay I discuss possible INTERMEDIATE INSTITUTIONS to connect
> voters with directors.  Intermediate institutions would allow the At Large
> membership to function even after the election is over.
>
> What Functions Need to be Performed?
> ====================================
> Elections perform two basic functions: input and accountability.  On the
> one hand, voters can elect directors who bring their concerns and values to
> the Board.  On the other hand, voters can vote out those directors who do
> not represent them effectively.
>
> However, elections occur at two-year intervals.  In the interim, these
> functions need to be performed by other means.  Two other possible
> mechanisms might be an "At Large Assembly" and an "At Large Forum."
>
> At Large Assembly
> =================
> Between the voters and the directors there could be a representative
> organization similar to the "councils" in the Supporting Organizations
> (SO). The SO councils propose policies and ultimately elect directors.
>
> An At Large Council was once proposed, but it was seen as potentially
> weakening members' legal rights and was abandoned.  The whole notion of an
> At Large "council" fell into disrepute.
>
> Nonetheless, some kind of intermediate body could still be useful, both to
> voters and to directors.  An At Large *assembly* could promote a connection
> with voters, soliciting input, distilling it into proposals, and
> communicating regularly to directors.  Likewise, such an assembly could
> hold directors accountable, informing voters when questionable actions have
> taken place and giving directors feedback on their actions.  An At Large
> Assembly could share some of the work of governance and provide a sounding
> board for ideas before they are implemented.
>
> However, the process for creating such a body is itself difficult.  What
> representation mechanisms should be used?  How many members should there
> be?  Before attempting to create an assembly, it might be easier to start
> with a simple forum.
>
> At Large Forum
> ==============
> In Europe, ICANN members have succeeded in establishing one list as the
> main forum for their region. It serves as the definitive location for
> meeting other members, discussing issues, and disseminating news.  Here one
> can find most leading activists.  One can also find many Board candidates
> participating in the forum.
>
> Once the European director is elected, it seems likely that the forum will
> continue, allowing participants to provide input and oversight of elected
> officials.  Furthermore, the entire list is archived on the web, so it
> provides a public record of discussions and commitments.
>
> The forum is "icann-eu."  It provides a promising first step towards a
> European regional assembly. In the self-organizing model so familiar on the
> Internet, the creation of a definitive forum can allow consensus to develop
> about more ambitious goals.  A regional forum can make possible the
> creation of a regional assembly.  If enough regions move in this direction,
> it may be possible to create a global At Large Assembly.
>
> To the best of this writer's knowledge, no other region has a definitive
> regional forum like "icann-eu."  True, ICANN now offers the "Q+A" forum for
> elections.  However, that forum is difficult to use and is specific for the
> election.  Likewise, the "icann-announce" list shares information to
> members, but it is under the exclusive control of ICANN.
>
> In North America, no listserv provides the definitive public forum.  There
> are, however, at least three relevant lists. Many activists subscribe to
> the Boston Working Group list ("bwg"), but it is a closed list with few
> subscribers. The "ador-doc" list is not well known, but it open and
> archived.  Perhaps the closest thing to a regional forum is the
> International Forum for the White Paper (IFWP), which was intensively used
> a few years ago but which is now little employed.  Without a definitive
> North American forum, the process of self-organization for the region could
> suffer.
>
> Investigations in other regions have identified no other regional forums.
> In Asia there is the  "icann-asia-l" list hosted by JCA-NET in Japan, but
> discussion there is light.  The "icann-d" list in Japan may be more active,
> but it is in Japanese language.  In Africa and Latin America I know of no
> lists.  Significantly, even the ICANN Q+A Forum for Latin America has not
> received a single posting at the time of this writing.
>
> There are a few global lists as well, although none of them have gained
> recognition as the definitive list. The Civil Society Internet Forum hosts
> one list.  The Unit for Internet Studies hosts another, on which policy
> researchers from around the world communicate.  The "icann-candidates" list
> attempted to define a forum for all Board candidates, but it has not had
> much discussion.
>
> Thus "icann-eu" seems to be the most promising model for regional
> self-organization. Activists and board candidates subscribe to it, so
> discussions there are important.  Moreover, the list is archived on the
> web, so it constitutes a discussion of record.
>
> Establishing Regional Forums
> ============================
> It is in the collective interest of every region to establish a forum.
> ICANN does not create such lists, but they can be created by members and
> board candidates on their own.
>
> All board candidates benefit from a regional forum.  It allows them to
> publicly debate issues and make contact with voters.  If board candidates
> can agree among themselves on a common forum, they can announce it on their
> web page and in the ICANN Q+A Forum.  Once defined, such a list is likely
> to attract more subscribers and so grow into a definitive forum.  The
> election period provides favorable conditions to establish regional forums,
> because members and candidates are hungry for information.
>
> It seems to matter little which organization hosts a region's forum. As
> long as the list is open to all subscribers, hosting a list seems to confer
> little control over the process. Furthermore, professional norms for
> disinterested list hosting are well-established, so instances of abuse are
> very rare.  A bigger problem is that of excessive or rude postings, but
> these can often be solved by filters installed on one's own computer.  (Mr.
> Jeff Williams posts as frequently in Europe as in the U.S.!)
>
> It simply remains for an organization with listserv and archiving
> capabilities to work with Board candidates to define a regional list.   A
> few weeks remain to put regional lists in place.
>
> >From Regional Forum to Regional Assembly
> ========================================
> Regional forums provide the means for further development. Following the
> elections, participants may want to discuss the creation of a regional
> Assembly with designated members.  That might require writing some kind of
> charter that defines how the Assembly would be constituted, how decisions
> would be made, and so on.  The regional assembly would be a more formal
> intermediate institution between members and directors.
>
> As described here, this process is roughly similar to that used to write
> the charters for the ICANN Supporting Organizations (SO).  Charters for
> those councils are now part of the ICANN bylaws (See
> http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#VI).
>
> It might be possible to create such intermediate institutions in time for
> the ICANN Board meeting in Los Angeles in November.  Regional listservs
> could be in place by the time of the October elections.  That would leave
> four weeks to the Los Angeles Board meeting.  In those four weeks, it might
> be possible for at least some regions to define assemblies. Ultimately, it
> might be possible to create an At Large Assembly for all five regions.
>
> It would be difficult -- but not impossible -- to have 5 regional
> assemblies and one global At Large Assembly in place by November.  The Los
> Angeles Board meeting could see the launch of intermediate institutions
> that firmly link ICANN directors to the membership.  That would be good for
> the members, good for the directors, and good for democracy in cyberspace!
>
> Cited Lists
> ===========
> icann-eu  -- http://www.fitug.de/icann-europe/
> BWG  --
> ADORE  - http://www.domain-owners.org
> IFWP  --
> ICANN Q+A Forum  -- http://members.icann.org/qa.html
> icann-announce  -- http://www.icann.org/announcements/
> icann-asia-l  -- icann-asia-l@mail.jca.apc.org
> icann-de  -- http://www.nic.ad.jp/jp/member/ml/icann-d/
> csif-l  -- http://www.civilsocietyinternetforum.org/lists.html
> Unit for Internet Studies  -- http://www.internetstudies.org/
> icann-candidates  -- http://www.egroups.com/icann-candidates
>
> ###

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 112k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 9236 fwd's to home ph#
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208