<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
[alac] Structure criteria draft..
- To: alac@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: [alac] Structure criteria draft..
- From: Thomas Roessler <roessler-mobile@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 09:07:43 -0300
Please find attached a first and very preliminary draft on what to
seem our insights about at-large structures so far. Note that the
ultimate conclusion is that (1) either you don't need principles
beyond formal essentials, or (2) there are no such criteria which
would accomplish the goal, so one would have to rely upon procedures.
I'll be around the public forum for another hour or so, and will go
to the afternoon's substantial public forum discussions, if anyone
is still interested in discussing this stuff.
--
Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<title>xxx</title>
<meta http-equiv="content-type"
content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-15">
<meta name="author"
content="Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>">
<style type="text/css"> <!--
h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, p, li, td { font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; }
h3 { margin-left: 40px; }
h4 { margin-left: 60px; }
h5, h6 { margin-left: 80px; }
-->
</style>
</head>
<body>
<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" border="0"
style="text-align: left; width: 100%;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="top"><img
src="icann-logo.gif" alt="" style="width: 188px; height: 145px;">
<br>
</td>
<td valign="middle"
style="text-align: center;">
<p><span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: x-large;">(Interim) At-Large
Advisory Committee</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: bold; font-size: xx-large;">Discussion
Paper: Certification Requirements for At-Large Structures<br>
</span></p>
<p><span style="font-weight: bold;">NN April 2003</span> </p>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<table cellpadding="2" cellspacing="2" border="1"
style="width: 80%; text-align: left; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;
background-color: yellow;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td valign="middle" style="text-align: center;"><br>
<span style="font-weight: bold;">Click here to comment on this
discussion
paper.</span><br>
<br>
<span style="font-weight: bold; color: red;">Comments are most useful
if they are received before NN April 2003.</span><br>
<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<br>
<hr width="100%" size="2">
<h3><a name="intro"></a>Introduction</h3>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">According to article XI.2.4.h of the new bylaws,
2/3 of the members of the steady-state At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)
will be elected by so-called Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs). There
will be one RALO per geographic region. Each RALO will be a non-for-profit
organization, and will sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with ICANN.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">Each RALO wil itself consist of so-called At-Large
Structures which are expected to be existing organizations. According to
article XI.2.4.i of the new bylaws, the At-Large Advisory Committee will
be responsible for certifying or de-certifying at-large structures with a
two-thirds vote. In this decision, the ALAC is supposed to apply criteria
which will be established by the Board, based on recommendations from the
ALAC. These criteria will be part of the relevant ICANN-RALO Memorandum of
Understanding.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">Some of these criteria will vary across
geographical
regions, and may be a matter of negotiation with those interested in setting
up a RALO. Other criteria may be globally uniform.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">In order to determine possible globally uniform
criteria (and to better understand possible side-effect of certain "local"
criteria), the ALAC plans to employ a discussion process similar to the one
which was used by the Evolution and Reform Committee throughout ICANN's reform
process.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">Thus, the present document is the first in a
series of discussion papers in which the ALAC will propose possible criteria
and processes, and will solicit comments.<br>
</p>
<h3><a name="bylaw-criteria"></a>Certification criteria defined in the new
bylaws</h3>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;"><span style="font-style: italic;">xxx - fix
this; outdated bylaw text used.</span><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">Article XI.2.4.h of ICANN's new bylaws contains
a number of fundamental criteria on at-large structures, which are, at this
point of time, not subject to further discussion. They do, however, form the
general framework to be used by the ALAC.<br>
</p>
<ol style="margin-left: 80px;">
<li>
<p><a name="bylaw-1"></a>At-Large Structures shall be self-supporting.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a name="bylaw-2"></a>The At-Large Structures shall involve individual
Internet users at the local or issue level.</p>
</li>
<li>
<p><a name="bylaw-3"></a>The At-Large Structures in any given region shall,
in the aggregate, be open to participation by individual Internet users who
are citizens and residents of the relevant geographic region.</p>
</li>
</ol>
<h3><a name="possible-uniform"></a>RALO models and corresponding criteria</h3>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">The ALAC has identified two fundamentally
different
models for RALOs, which might require different kinds of criteria to be applied
to potential at-large structures in a given region. <br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">1.</span>
The first model is focused on putting all decision-making power in a given
RALO into the hands of individual members of the various at-large structures.
At-Large structures would be used to establish a regional membership which
would then hold a vote. In this system, at-large structures would basically
just certify the existence of those individuals interested in participating.
At-Large Structures' internal organization would remain separate from their
RALO involvement.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">Implementing this approach would at least require
a regional secretariat for managing membership issues and managing
processes.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">At-large structures would basically take on
an administrative function; the quality of their performance of this function
could, for instance, be assessed by approaches such as spot-checking some
individuals. In particular, only relatively minimal trust in these organizations
and their membership would be required. <br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">It can be
argued that no substantial criteria would need to be applied to at-large
structures with this approach -- establishing the mere existence of the
organizations
in question, and the identity of their leadership, would ultimately be
sufficient.</span><br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">It is well-known that this approach implies
a risk of "capture" when a single large-scale organization may effectively
take over an entire region. It is not clear how a region could protect against
this risk through objective criteria which are to be applied on a non-arbitrary
basis.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">2. </span>The
second model focuses on getting existing organizations involved as a whole.
While individual members of these organizations would of course be expected
to participate in broad policy discussions, decisions on the RALO level
(including
the appointment of ALAC members) would have to be done by representatives
of the at-large structures, assigning (e.g.) one vote to each at-large
structure.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">With this model, the greatest risk of undue
capture consists in a great number of (small?) organizations with overlapping
membership joining the regional at-large organization, and in organizations
with agendas not related to individual internet users' interests joining
a RALO and determining its positions.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;">No objective and non-arbitrary criteria are
known which could help avoid this risk. The most common approach used in
situations like this one is to start from a set of known and trusted
organizations
which can then co-opt other organizations they deem trustworthy.<br>
</p>
<p style="margin-left: 80px;"><span style="font-weight: bold;">With this
approach, "objective" criteria would be minimized, and at-large structure
certification would rely upon the judgment of established structures "in
good standing.</span><br>
</p>
<hr width="100%" size="2"><br>
<br>
</body>
</html>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|