[ALSC-Forum] public mailing list - Board Decision

[Alan Levin]

The ICANN Board seems to have indicated earlier that this is the place for
all
At Large discussion. Either that or that the only At Large discussion that
they support, is the discussion about the election.

>> from the scribe - public comments to the Board:
G.   Hans Klein (CPSR): Studies coming in. Need for high-level thinking
here. Then make specific recommendations. Bildt says ALSC mailing list
helpful. At Large might appreciate a public forum to discuss among
themselves. Request the creation of a general Public Forum for the At Large
Membership. ICC could help.
> end snip

This statement was made as a result of discussions at the NAIS meeting. One
of the clear conclusions of the interim report is that within the current
scope, there remains a need for a public voice in ICANN. One of the problems
right now is the lack of interest in ALM through disillusionment amongst the
public regarding various problems with the elections, AND the confusion
regarding impact and channel.

NAIS were formally asked (by an ALSC member) to 1. Create an At Large
mailing list, 2. make a request to the Board to acknowledge this list. NAIS
discussed this and since NAIS is a project, in order for some continuity, we
recognise the ICC as a more appropriate host and requested them to make the
request from the Board.

As such Hans made the above request on the request of NAIS.

I feel that with exception of Nii Quaynor almost the entire Board missed the
point and focused on the ALSC.

> from the scribe - Board discussion on the comment:
M.   Use of At Large Study List to foster At Large Discussion
       1.   Cerf: See http://www.atlargestudy.org /forum.shtml . Could
remind people that this forum exists by sending a further email to the
entire At Large group.
       2.   Lynn: Consider also the ALSC Announce list -
http://www.atlargestudy.org .
       3.   Cerf: Propose using the At Large 100,000+ list to publicize the
At Large Study Forum and remind them of how to sign up.
       4.   Kraaijenbrink: List has been used before for this purpose. List
should be closed now, not used again. Can't keep using that list.
       5.   Auerbach: The At Large list reflects people who went to some
effort to join. And little cost to sending an email.
       6.   Lynn: It's serious to send out mail using this system. Ties up
our mail server for about a day, preventing other mail operations. More
seriously, it's important to use a list only for the purpose for which it
was initially intended.
       7.   Auerbach: Agreed that we shouldn't spam this list. Should use
this list once, at most twice.
       8.   Wilson: We previously made a commitment to use this list only
once. Suggest that we review what we said at that time, and that we stand by
it. If we didn't commit never to do this again, we might do it again. But if
we said we wouldn't, then we should not.
       9.   Cerf: What commitment did we make?
           . Touton: Don't recall a hard commitment that we wouldn't ever
use the list again. But we shouldn't use it many times; that would be beyond
the spirit of what was said. Note also that addresses are stale.
       10.   Cerf: Perhaps people signed up to vote because someone told
them they should, but these people don't desire an ongoing relationship with
ICANN. Initial limited response might indicate that these people just aren't
interested.
       11.   Cerf: What to do? One strong opposition to using the list
again. Others have some concerns.
       12.   Abril i Abril: Discussing sending another email to tell people
about the ALSC. Already did this. Repeat it? Tend to think not. Also,
concern that we previously promised to use this list only for purposes of
coordinating election.
       13.   Kraaijenbrink: There are places where discussion of At Large
issues can take place. Our work here should be on hold until Bildt presents
the results of the ALSC study.
       14.   Mueller-Maguhn: Should have a "participation page" on the ICANN
site reminding people of the ALSC process. Do this instead of sending
message to all registrants.
       15.   Auerbach: It's a waste of resources to let At Large fade away.
Would be saddened to see that work go to waste.
       16.   Cerf: Suggest posting information about ALSC on the At Large
site.

I am also very proud to note that the scribe missed Quaynors important
statement which indicted that He realised that the Board do not quite get
it, the community is making a call to the Board to recognise that the
community are attempting to legitimately self-organise.

Rather than analysis of the irony or understanding, I propose to the ALSC
that they support a list to be created by the ICC for discussion on broader
At Large issues (eg: discuss@icannmembers.org), so that we can immediately
encourage further self-organisation.