[governance] What happened at the NARALO/ALAC/CCNSO?

Izumi AIZU iza at anr.org
Fri Dec 14 10:01:30 EST 2007


As I have been on the road and the connectivity in Washington DC in my
limited time of sittng in front of a PC, I cannot read these
interesting postings
on this thread. I just scanned them, not read fully, but I was quite confused,
not, the discussion was quite confusing

Bringing dot US issue to NARALO's attnention is fine, and I agree it is an
important issue, but then making the overall  denial of ALAC because NARALO
could not react to Danny's proposal is too much exageration to non NR members
of ALAC.

Similarly, bringing the 700 MHz US domestinc issue into the debate
was not helpful at all. It is not our (direct) business, sorry.
Further, bringing the AtLarge Summit to compare also seems not adoquate.
I would like to see the debate stick to the dot US issue and bring it
forward by concerned people in bottom up and also effective manner.

We have limited bandwidth in our brains, just bringing too many different
issues into one bascket is messy and frankly I have little time to follow
all from Asia pacific where we have our own headaches.

thanks,

izumi


2007/12/11, Jacqueline A. Morris <jam at jacquelinemorris.com>:
> I don't know why they decided to focus on one and not the other - the
> reasons for the Summit should be in the proposal to the ICANN Board, so we
> should know then.
>
> I'm confused by the difference you make here between freedom of association
> and democracy - if we have an organization in which the decisions are made
> by majority vote of the members, how is that not a democratic organization,
> or at least an organization that is run on democratic principles? To me,
> freedom of association is the ability to associate with anyone that you want
> - as opposed to apartheid, for example, where one was prohibited from
> associating with people of one's choice based on race. But as one can decide
> to join an association where decisions are not made by the membership, they
> aren't similar, hence my confusion.  Seems to me that you define both terms
> differently?
>
> Also - the At Large has power over ALAC's work schedule and budget
> proposals, and the resources assigned to ALAC as the RALOs appoint 10 of the
> 15, and those reps are there to implement the wishes of the RALO.
>
> "ALAC is there to give ICANN user perspectives on actual policy choices that
> ICANN has to make, and if ALAC consistently does not do that, what are we to
> conclude?"
>
> Maybe that the users are not interested or not informed enough? If the
> latter, then there are things that ALAC can and should do to inform and
> educate (and several are underway). If the former, then the ALSes that have
> joined and find that they are not interested enough in the policy issues,
> should be de-accredited, leaving ALSes that are truly interested in the
> issues.
>
> Jacqueline
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, December 10, 2007 13:21
> > To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > Subject: RE: Re: [governance] What happened at the NARALO/ALAC/CCNSO?
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > >From: Jacqueline A. Morris [mailto:jam at jacquelinemorris.com]
> > >
> > >That Milton, is one of the things that we have to accept in a bottom-
> > up
> > >process that gives the users the power. They may decide to do things
> > that
> > >you, me, others don't agree with. But if a lot more of them vote to
> > spend
> > >energy and resources for the Summit and none for the .us contract,
> > than
> > the
> > >ones who vote the other way, that's the democratic process.
> >
> > No, Jacky, that's not "democracy" that's "freedom of association,"
> > which
> > is something I strongly favor but has little relevance to the issue of
> > how users are represented in global governance of ICANN issues. This
> > freedom of assocation doesn't give "users the power" over anything
> > except what to do with their own time and resources -- a freedom they
> > already have anyway. They don't need ALAC for that.
> >
> > The issue you are studiously ignoring is this: if ALAC is there to give
> > ICANN user perspectives on actual policy choices that ICANN has to
> > make,
> > and if ALAC consistently does not do that, what are we to conclude?
> >
> > A number of conclusions are possible. One is that the people who are
> > attracted to ALAC are not all that interested in the day to day issues
> > of ICANN policy making but in other things... Another is that the
> > structure of ALAC tends to encourage its members to do other things
> > than
> > pay attention to detailed policy issues, because the rewards for those
> > other activities are perceived to be higher. Another is that ALAC-ers
> > don't feel that they can really influence the specific policy issues on
> > which comment is possible, so they choose not to do so and concentrate
> > their time on things they feel they can control.
> >
> > I don't know which of these is right, if any, but would be interested
> > in
> > your perspective.
> >
> > --MM
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> >      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> > To be removed from the list, send any message to:
> >      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> >
> > For all list information and functions, see:
> >      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
>


-- 
                        >> Izumi Aizu <<

           Institute for HyperNetwork Society, Oita
           Kumon Center, Tama University, Tokyo
                                  Japan
                                 * * * * *
           << Writing the Future of the History >>
                                www.anr.org
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance



More information about the Governance mailing list