Re: [alac] Proposed additional questions for ALAC applicants
- To: Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel <michel@xxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [alac] Proposed additional questions for ALAC applicants
- From: AIZU <aizu@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 23:42:14 +0900
At 10:14 04/12/12 +0100, Vittorio Bertola wrote:
On Fri, 10 Dec 2004 11:17:25 -0800, ICANN At-Large - Denise Michel
>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
>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
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.
vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Vecchio sito, nuovo toblÉ»...