Re: [alac] Proposed additional questions for ALAC applicants

[AIZU <aizu@xxxxxxx>]

At 10:14 04/12/12 +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:17:25 -0800, ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel
> <michel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> >No.  Allow me to clarify.  The general sense of my observation is that,
> >with some of these questions, you seem to be asking for a higher level
> >of commitment from new ALAC members than from existing members.
>
> Well, personally I take it for granted that, if I am a member of a certain
> group, I am expected to attend all physical and virtual meetings of the
> group unless I have specific reasons not to do so. Is there anyone in the
> Committee who thinks that showing up on conf calls and reading the mailing
> list should only be an optional commitment for ALAC members?
>
> I'd still make it clear for new members that we expect some commitments from
> them. We might perhaps weaken the wording and talk about "expected
> commitments" or something like that, but I don't think that we should tell
> to applicants that they are not expected to participate to our meetings.

I support what Vittorio says here. Asking for good amount of commitments
from new applicants do not mean asking the same thing NOW to the
existing members.


> >I
> >understand you have an idea of what it takes to be an "optimal" ALAC
> >member, but it seems to me that current ALAC members should agree to a
> >level of commitment before new members are asked to do so (I think it's
> >the fair and equitable thing to do).
>
> This might be another thread :) In fact, we have been encouraging people to
> reconsider their status and availability, and this is why are introducing
> four new members between Cape Town and Mar del Plata.

I also agree that commitments to new members and applying that to existing 
ones
are different things. Let's separate these two things.


> In the meantime, as you also say, I think that the questions you pose are to
> be considered in our "position paper" (BTW - how is the work proceeding?
> could we please have the "terms of reference" proposal posted in the next
> days?), but we can't stop the process - so, unless I hear other objections,
> I'd go on with the list of questions including some small edits. If so, I
> can send a final version to you in a couple of days.

I have not done much about position paper and its terms of reference,
sorry about that and thanks for the reminder. will try to do so shortly.

And I think we should proceed now.

izumi


> --
> vb.               [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
> http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Vecchio sito, nuovo toblƒÈ...