[ALSC-Forum] Views of IAT-CNR on proposed action statement - FYI

[Denise Michel]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Stefano Trumpy" <Stefano.Trumpy@iat.cnr.it>
To: "Denise Michel" <dmichel@atlargestudy.org>
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 12:14 AM
Subject: Re: ALSC
> >
> >*Draft* Proposed Action Statement for ICANN's Board
> >
> >Based on an extensive outreach, discussion, research, and
consensus-building
> >campaign the ALSC recommends that, on November 15, 2001, the ICANN Board
> >adopt the following recommendations concerning At-Large participation
> >and representation.
> >
> >(1) The Board affirms that individual Internet users have a significant
> >stake in ICANN's activities and should have the opportunity of fully
> >participating in ICANN.
>
> agreed;
>
> >(2) While the ALSC's final report remains open for comment and
> >consideration, the Board acknowledges that the following basic principles
> >should guide expedited action on At-Large:
> >
> >(a) Create an At-Large Supporting Organization (ALSO) as a
regionally-based
> >framework for informed participation of any interested individual and for
> >At-Large involvement in ICANN policy and decision-making (including
> >mechanisms to foster discussion among individuals and with ICANN's
> >decision-making bodies);
>
> it looks to us that, in the present structure of ICANN, the
> initiative of setting up an ad hoc Supporting Organization is the
> only one viable;
>
> >(b) Focus At-Large membership on an identifiable and vested community (an
> >ALSO electorate) to provide a practical mechanism for voter registration
and
> >self-funding (e.g. The ALSC recommends that membership be based on
> >individual domain name holders);
>
> also this choice is reasonnable; the only one which can assure a self
> funding ALSO; ideally the previous model of considering any e-mail
> user has a sense but the fee collection would be not practicable;
> also in case of involving domain names holders as ALSO members, the
> fee collection and managing the membership will not trivial matter,
> but we see it feasible. A huge implementation effort will be
> necessary.
>
> >(c) Provide a proportionate role for At-Large members in selecting
ICANN's
> >Board (along with other ICANN constituencies) (e.g. The ALSC recommends 6
> >At-Large Directors in a 19 member Board).
>
> we agree on this point; previous distribution was umbalanced, if we
> consider ICANN's goals;
>
> >(3) The Board requests that the ICANN CEO solicit expressions of interest
to
> >determine the degree of interest in creating local and regional ALSO
> >entities that would support informed participation of interested
individuals
> >and At-Large involvement in ICANN, and report the results to the Board at
> >the March 2002 ICANN meeting.
>
> the idea of splitting the ALSO into regions is naturally tied to the
> election process and eases regional coordination; this will need an
> effort for global coordination which should take place during ICANN's
> meetings; also an ICANN"s staff effort will be necessary; the problem
> of who will maintain the regional lists, the global list, will have
> to be addressed;
>
> >(4) The Board authorizes the extension of the ALSC until March 31, 2002
to
> >work with the Supporting Organizations, other interested parties, and
ICANN
> >staff on proposing detailed plans for an At-Large membership, voter
> >registration, and a regionally-based, self-supporting ALSO.
>
> this is obvious and it will be a busy time in perspective, if ICANN
> wants to respect the schedule. ICANN has to respect the schedule if
> does not want to loose legitimacy.
>
> Stefano Trumpy and Franco Denoth
>