<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
Summary of Public Comments - Independent Review of the ALAC - Final Report
- To: "alac-final-2008@xxxxxxxxx" <alac-final-2008@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Summary of Public Comments - Independent Review of the ALAC - Final Report
- From: Marc Salvatierra <marc.salvatierra@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 05:04:26 -0800
An online public comment forum was opened for comments on the issues raised in
the Westlake report. Comments were received from ISOC-AU, Danny Younger, Sylvia
Caras, ISPCP, Alan Levin, Olivier MJ Crepin-Lebland, Alan Greenberg, ALAC.
Topics covered in the forum included:
* Ongoing purpose of ALAC
* Some support for the ongoing purpose
* Suggestion that ALAC needs more time
* One suggestion that ALAC has no continuing purpose and does not
represent the views of users
* Regional issues
* Representation should be proportional to number of users
* Suggestion that two additional non-voting Asia Pacific representatives
could be appointed
* At Large structure
* Support for current structure
* RALOs need more time (and one clear suggestion that they should be shut
down if not working)
* Need to clarify the ways that end users can participate
* Need outreach to grow ALS numbers
* Resourcing
* Support for extra resourcing based on clear plan
* Staff not always the answer; resources could be deployed in other ways
* Centralised staff needed for coordination of activity
* ALAC should have control over staff
* Regional budgets are needed
* Relationship with other ICANN entities
* Need to clarify roles
* Perceived overlaps are not an issue
* At Large voice is relevant beyond GNSO issues
* Voting seat
* Support for a voting seat for accountability to end users
* Support for maintaining liaison
* Planning
* Support for better ALAC planning, linked to ICANN planning
* Support for planning, but should maintain independence
* Planning necessary for improvement
* Should be "light" so that process does not become the focus
* Tools
* Support for use of better tools
* Need to remember accessibility issues
* Consultation periods
* 45 days is too long
* Translation
* Support for continuing and better translation, but need to be mindful
of costs
* Westlake report
* Some opinions left out
* Not historical
[summary prepared by Patrick Sharry; submitted by ICANN Staff]
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
|