ALAC issues (was: Re: [governance] Innovation)

[Izumi AIZU]

Bret,

almost jumping in, and first of all, as being a long time incumbent
member of ALAC, I am sorry for not taking proper action in time for
your excellent comment on transparency and accountability.
I have no good excuse.

I also appreciate your observation and simple but seemingly
effective suggestion. In fact, most, if not all, of ALSs are
not directly dealing with the ICANN's core policy areas, and
thus may have difficulty in responding timely to the often
complex ICANN issues.

I don't have an easy solution at hand, but I think the issue
presented here is quite important and AtLarge community
(and larger civil society interested in ICANN issues)
should think hard to come up with better solutions.

In a way, a hybrid model of a) and b) may work. I mean,
expand membership of AtLarge, more open to active
individual members so that their inputs would make
good impacts.

izumi

2007/11/27, Bret Fausett <bfausett at internet.law.pro>:
> On Nov 26, 2007, at 11:03 AM, Kieren McCarthy wrote:
>  >If there is a bottleneck, or a procedural problem, or a structural
> issue?
>
> I've given this a fair amount of thought recently, in large part
> because the ALAC proved itself incapable of reacting to an ICANN call
> for comments on a fairly important issue, in spite of the fact that
> the work was done for it by a long time ALAC supporter (me). You can
> see my comment to the ALAC here:
>
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org/
> 2007q4/002359.html
>
> I think one part of the ALAC's problem is that it is composed of
> organizations, but the people involved are not authorized to speak on
> behalf of those organizations in all instances. Most organizations
> need some formal approval process before they sign their names to a
> policy document, and they are usually and understandably unwilling to
> attach their names to something that is not core to their mission and/
> or is poorly understood by their leadership. ICANN matters are rarely
> core to anyone's missions and almost always poorly understood by
> those not involved on a daily basis.
>
> To solve this, the ALAC could (a) abandon the organizational model
> and move to an individual membership model; or (b) asks organizations
> to appoint one member from the ALS to serve as liaison to the RALO,
> but free him or her to act in a personal capacity, not as a
> representative of the organization. I'm sure there are more
> possibilities as well.
>
> --
> Bret Fausett (skype me at "lextext")
> smime.p7s is a digital signature
> http://www.imc.org/smime-pgpmime.html
> -------------------------------------
____________________________________________________________
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