Re: [alac] Re: Reply from ALAC Chair

[Annette Muehlberg <Annette.Muehlberg@xxxxxx>]

Dear Frank,

thank you for your e-mail in which you stated "that this is the third time that 
the response time has been moved."

For the records:
We had a telefon appointment right before Christmas (my last hours before 
leaving office and flying to my parents in law). It turned out that we both 
were waiting for each others call (you, as staff at an ICANN office - me as a 
volunteer paying on my own and being at an office that blocks phone calls to 
foreign countries - for good reasons...).

In my friday e-mail, I wrote that I had written the response to your report, 
but have not managed to get back to all the members of the committee yet and 
therefore would like to send it to you monday morning, but if that was a 
problem to you I would be available for you this very friday (see my mail 
below).

I would not call these two instances "removing response time".

Apart from that: Where I live, Christmas and New Year is the time when families 
get together. Many people take the remaining days of the first January-week 
off. The fact, that the report was the first issue we worked on this week, is 
due to the fact that we highly estimate the ombudsman's work.

Best Regards

Annette


> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: fowlie@xxxxxxxxx
> Gesendet: 06.01.07 01:52:52
> An:  "Frank Fowlie" <fowlie@xxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "Annette Muehlberg" <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>,        "Nick Ashton-Hart" 
> <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,        "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
> alac@xxxxxxxxx
> Betreff: Re: [alac] Re: Reply from ALAC Chair


> Dear Wendy,
> 
> Thank you very much for your email.  Let me respond by saying that my 
> communications in this regard have not been mis-directed.  While Vittorio is 
> the former Chair, he is presently the Board Liasion for ALAC, and as such is 
> very much the primary contact for my Office.  In the past, Roberto was also 
> the key point of contact.
> 
> I recongize that ALAC members, as well as members of the Board, and the 
> various supporting structures are volunteers.  I also recognize that as 
> volunteers, members of the ALAC accept the responibilities of committee 
> membership, and the benefits of same.  Requests made during the course of my 
> investigations are tempered with a balance of the need to conduct the work, 
> to investigate and resolve the matter, to supply or negotiate reasonable 
> expectations on the reciept of material, the complexity and availability of 
> the information needed to complete the reviews, and the issue of ongoing 
> unfairness by slow ADR processes.
> 
> Should you have specific suggestions for the streamlining of ALS approval 
> processes, that would seem to me to be a logical matter for discussion within 
> the ALAC.
> 
> Please do feel free to contact me again if you have any questions or concerns.
> 
> Best regards,
> 
> Frank
> 
>  
> Frank Fowlie
> Ombudsman
> ICANN   
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 17:10:46 
> To:fowlie@xxxxxxxxx
> Cc:"Annette Muehlberg" <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>,       "Nick Ashton-Hart" 
> <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,       "Vittorio Bertola" <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 
> alac@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [alac] Re: Reply from ALAC Chair
> 
> Dear Frank,
> 
> While I appreciate your attention to procedural fairness, I think it 
> is only fair to note that these are overlapping holidays in many 
> parts of the world, and your initial communication to the Committee 
> on this matter was misdirected to our former chair.
> 
> Please also remember that the ALAC Committee are all volunteers.  I 
> consider the procedural hurdles the ALAC faces (and at times, 
> regrettably, passes on to ALS applicants) to be problems with ICANN's 
> structure for individual involvement more than problems personal to 
> the Committee.  A structure that enabled individual Internet users 
> greater representation in ICANN decisionmaking would take a great 
> deal of unnecessary pressure off these approval mechanisms.
> 
> Thank you,
> --Wendy
> 
> 
> At 11:46 AM 1/5/2007, Frank Fowlie wrote:
> >Dear Annette,
> >
> >Thank you for your email.  I begin by noting that this is the third 
> >time that the response time has been moved.  I also restate my 
> >earlier comment that  one of my concerns is that the overall delay 
> >towards the applicant is compounded.
> >
> >I continue to await your response.
> >
> >I again offer the invitation to individual members of the ALAC to 
> >contact me diretly with any information they may wish to share.
> >
> >
> >
> >Frank Fowlie
> >Ombudsman
> >ICANN
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>
> >Date: Fri, 05 Jan 2007 15:57:24
> >To:fowlie@xxxxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: Reply from ALAC Chair
> >
> >Dear Frank,
> >
> >my answer is ready, but I could not get back to the committee yet -
> >weekend is a better time for volunteers. So if it is ok with you  I
> >would like to send the answer to you, that you have it when you start
> >work on monday morning. Is that ok with you? Otherwise we could get in
> >touch today.
> >
> >All the best
> >
> >Annette
> >
> >Frank Fowlie schrieb:
> > > Super, thank you.  I look forward to your information.
> > >
> > > Frank Fowlie
> > > Ombudsman
> > > ICANN
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@xxxxxx>
> > > Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:49:01
> > > To:fowlie@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Cc:Nick Ashton-Hart <nashton@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,       Vittorio 
> > Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: Reply from ALAC Chair
> > >
> > > Dear Frank,
> > >
> > > Happy new year to you too.
> > > You will receive the reply tomorrow.
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > >
> > > Annette
> > >
> > >
> > > Frank Fowlie schrieb:
> > >
> > >> Happy new year Nick and Annette.
> > >>
> > >> I am writing to advise that I have yet to have a reply, either 
> > by email or voice, to my requests for information from the ALAC 
> > chair.  In my previous correspondence I had asked for a response by 
> > January 3.  This has not been replied to.
> > >>
> > >> As Bylaw V allows the Ombudsman access to all information held 
> > by ICANN, and as I wish to be as fair and balanced in my evaluation 
> > as possible, a response on these issues by the ALAC committee is 
> > not only desireable, but ethical.
> > >>
> > >> May I please receive a firm (but short) date as to when I may 
> > receive the response from the Chair?  Due to the time lag, I would 
> > prefer to have this on the record, and to receive this by email, as 
> > well as the response itself.
> > >>
> > >> I note that the delay in responding to my Office compounds any 
> > delay issue with respect to the applicant.
> > >>
> > >> Best Regards,
> > >>
> > >> Frank
> > >>
> > >> Frank Fowlie
> > >> Ombudsman
> > >> ICANN
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> 
> --
> Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
> Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
> http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
> http://www.chillingeffects.org/  
> 
> 

--