Re: (Fwd) [ga] On the ALAC's Request for Comments, from L. Gallegos

["ALAC" <alac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thank you for your comments.

 

Regarding your belief that the process is too burdensome and is unnecessary to communicate a view to ICANN, and that “As long as the public is excluded from meaningful participation in the election of directors, full membership and all rights thereof, the ALAC is meaningless.”:

[Note:  Comments from another individual to ALAC members (not authorized for posting on the ALAC forum) echoed this theme, objecting to what he described as the ALAC’s attempt to replace individuals’ “rights to representation” with “benefits of participation,” stating that the ALAC is not supporting workable mechanisms for informed participation, and proposing a “Supporting Organization for the At-Large that elects half of the ICANN Board.”]  

The ALAC has attempted to comply with the bylaws and propose appropriate criteria, processes and guidelines to help launch a global At-Large infrastructure.  We will continue working on this with an eye towards simplification (including creating a simple, easy to understand and complete At-Large Structure applications form).  Individuals have a right to communicate freely. The ALAC is trying to help them communicate more effectively and influentially with ICANN. A certain amount of process and protocol is necessary to achieve this goal.

 

The ALAC is committed to achieving informed participation in, and representation of, the At-Large community in ICANN.  Working with existing groups (and anyone else who is interested) throughout the world to substantively involve individual Internet users seems like a practical, expedient way of “jump-starting” an engaged At-Large community.  The ALAC (and this proposal) should be viewed as a critical first step towards structured involvement of the individual user community in ICANN and towards a formalized role in ICANN's policy development process that ensures individual users' views are taken into account. This is the ALAC’s goal. 

 

The need for a structured process to bring to ICANN the individual user community’s opinions and input is further reinforced by the following observations by an ALAC member:

 

• The only way to extract a homogenous idea form the "big audience" is to work it through different levels of discussions. To have regional-level organizations that encourage these discussions is unquestionably useful.
• Posting comments in an e-mail list doesn't seem to be a better way to handle massive public participation. There are very few who can afford to invest all their time writing opinions in mailing lists (or even posting on websites expressing their disagreement).
• Indirect representation is a system commonly used in modern democracies all around the world. Dictators often present themselves as liberators and claim to express the public interest. The differences and similarities of populism and democracy apply here.
• A workable mechanism for participation and representation is unavoidable.
• To find support in existing organizations that represent Internet user interests seems to be the best way to foster the development of a public participation process in the ICANN community.
• You certainly don't need a card that states "director" to be heard and considered when bringing a good idea to the table. However, to have user representation on the Board, is, eventually, a highly desirable idea.

The ALAC views this proposal as a workable mechanism for participation and representation. The ALAC has been structured to make sure that the voice of different sectors of the Internet community will be heard and that their representation can be effectively taken into account. The ALAC, and this proposal, give At-Large a role in the selection of Board members and provide At-Large with meaningful involvement in the development of policy within ICANN (in addition to providing mechanisms for commenting on proposed policies).  For example, ALAC activities to date include:

 

• Outreach to At-Large communities in various regions, and proposing criteria, processes, and guidelines for creating an At-Large infrastructure;
• Appointing five delegates to the Nominating Committee (more than other stakeholder groups), and recruiting candidates with “At-Large experience”;
• Publicizing and analyzing proposed policies and their potential effect on the At-Large community, and providing mechanisms and processes for At-Large input and discussions – a website, forum, and announce list have been created, and ALAC liaisons are active on the GNSO Council, WHOIS task force, and the new gTLD committee; and
• Providing advice on ICANN issues, proposals, and activities that are relevant to individual Internet users – the ALAC has  solicited input and provided guidance on the WHOIS database, new gTLDs, internationalized domain names, and WIPO recommendations (to name a few issues).

We look forward to hearing from you again.

The Interim At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)