Re: [ICANN-EU] European At Large Council

["Jeanette Hofmann" <jeanette@medea.wz-berlin.de>]

Dear  Vittorio & Roberto & Giorgio ;-)
 

> > >>	- How do we avoid the group being taken over, flooded, or accused 	
> > >> not to be representative?

For some reason, I'd expect rather the opposite, meaning that this 
lovely intercultural place could well end up deserted (no, not entirely 
deserted, but almost) after the election period has finally cooled down. 
In the same vein, I can't imagine that 35000  members will really wish 
to participate in the day to day business of the at large membership. 
Also, I can't imagine who on earth and for what purposes would want 
to try a take over.  


> > >It will not have as a target to be representative, and will therefore
> > >not 
> >be
> > >able to "speak on behalf of the Membership".

As some people on this list have already pointed out, 
representativeness is difficult to achieve at present. The candidates 
form a sub species, which does not represent the whole ALM.

> >But then, it will be possibly useless. If it's not representative, why
> >should its voice be kept into account by ICANN or by the Director? 

A director who wouldn't listen to the community's voice because it 
lacks a formal structure would be the wrong choice anyway. And 
regarding ICANN, I wouldn't be so sure that a formally established 
council makes a great difference. Especially if it takes decades to 
agree on a modus vivendi. 

> >would be the same if each of us wrote down a statement and got some
> >signatures on it by other At Large members.

 
> You are preaching to the converted.
> In the opening statement of my message, that you read too much in a
> hurry ;>), I wrote that "I personally think that eventually we will end
> up with an elected (therefore closed) group, because I don't think that
> this free form structure (basically, this mailing list) can address
> issues like polling the membership on specific issues, coordinating the
> membership of different regions, and so on. But it is OK, we need to
> start from somewhere anyhow.".

As it seems, we have a rough consensus on building up representative 
structures as a future goal. In any case, I don't remember anyone 
speaking up against such a project. 

> In other words, if there's no consensus for the time being for a stable
> (closed, representative) group, with the task of coordinating the
> activities and to foster consensus, at least let's have this list going.
> 
> The argument that we cannot arbitrarily choose a certain number of "top
> voted" people is valid (even if it is still better than nothing, IMHO).

I don't agree on this one. I think this would be worse than an open 
mailing list, in case you consider this to be nothing ;-)

> The only chance to have a legitimate Council, or Coordination Committe,
> or Advisory Body, or whatever, is to elect one. But then, we don't even
> have the list of the electors.

Yes, perhaps another election would be the way to go. 
 
> The only way I see is to talk the candidates into pushing for this to
> happen if they are elected.

I'd imagine a council as a group of people to discuss tricky questions, 
to work on dramatically complex problems and thereby becoming a 
benefit for all who happen to be part of this club. The director would 
be just one of them. Too optimistic?

jeanette