Purpose of this Drafting Team:
to review the relevant existing ALAC Rules of Procedure (listed below) and ascertain what (if any) aspects of these has continued relevance and purpose to be included (as modified) in a new set of simple, clearly understood, effective and plain language Rules and Guidelines for use by the ALAC from end October 2012
to draft any new language and Rules deemed relevant, and useful (noting the aspirations for the rules listed above)
Focus of this Drafting Team:
Description of ALAC structure and function including reference to relevant ByLaws, current practices and future practice/engagement plans post ALAC review Implementation.
At-Large Definition and Structure Drafting Team Membership
DSDT Definitions - 29 January 2013
At-Large Definition and Structure Draft Team Sandbox - Not in use
At-Large Definition and Structure Drafting Team Rules and References
At-Large Rules of Procedure Modification Proposals Workspace
At-Large Definition and Structure Drafting Team Pen Holders Workspace
Definition and Structure DT MEETINGS
2013
13 February 2013 (This call was postponed until 21 Feb)
2012
At Large Definition and Structure Work Plan
This Draft Work Plan was sent out on the ALAC DSDT mailing list as a means of guiding how we approach our assignment. Feedback and comments are welcome. Red means tasks which have been completed and Blue means in progress. Green means overdue and some have yet to complete their tasks. Caveat: This Work Plan may be subject to change and participants are required to keep monitoring the Wiki for updates and developments.
Task # | Work Plan | Start Date | Finish Date |
Preparatory Call |
| ||
Introductory Text to set Context DSDT - Overview |
|
| |
Introductory Call |
|
| |
EXISTING DEFINITIONS |
|
| |
Review of Existing Definitions by DSDT |
| 15thAug, 2012 | |
Peer Review of each other’s Draft reviews for comments and discussion N.B Reminders were sent to those who had yet to complete their assignments on 15th and 25th Aug, 2012. |
|
| |
STRUCTURE |
|
| |
Call to discuss and set Agenda to set context for Structure of ALAC Agenda Posted to DSDT Mailing List |
| 24th Aug 2012 | |
Joint Call with all Drafting Teams from DSDT; At Large Rules of Procedure Process Drafting Team comprising of Meetings and Administration Drafting Team and Elections, Selection and Appointment Drafting Team; and Duties and Metrics Drafting Team DSDT informed all DTs that we will solicit new Definitions that may have crept up in their working discussions and there will be a cut off date. Progress Reports and areas of overlap identified). Holly Raiche co-chaired this meeting; Summary sent to DSDT Mailing List **Penholders to tease out critical issues for discussions on the Wiki prior to next call |
| 27th Aug | |
ALAC DSDT Call (To identify areas of overlap) ** Natalia to chair this call |
| 29th Aug | |
Review of Headers |
| 4th Sep | |
Review of Structures |
|
| |
NEW DEFINITIONS |
|
| |
Call to set context for new definitions |
|
| |
Reviewing Draft Text by other Drafting teams |
|
| |
Call to be set up with other DTs where we will get them to give their Input on New Definitions |
|
| |
Consolidating new terms and definitions |
|
| |
EVALUATION |
|
| |
Call to discuss and evaluate process |
|
| |
Consolidation of material |
|
| |
Background Paper with detailed references of input of DSDT Team and others |
|
| |
Penholders to initiate weaving everything into one single document |
|
| |
Trimming Process |
|
| |
First Draft Text Prepared for Input |
|
|
8 Comments
Holly Raiche
In my general comments, I suggestd deletion of the definitions for rapporteur, delegte, motion and resolution. I also suggtd merging the definition of Al-Large Structure and RALO.
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
Dear All,
In preparation of the call next week, I would like to encourage us to keep in mind the following as we discuss the shape and form that the draft will look like. We only have one hour and so we would like to make it productive as you are all professionals and busy in your respective spheres. Recognising that volunteers time is "valuable", it is in all our interest that we be as effective and efficient as possible in all our meetings. I value your time and contributions. Thank you for your continued commitment and diligence.
For those in the Prague discussions, we had gone through this but bearing in mind that there are many who were not with us in Prague, we are highlighting this again and this time through the Wiki.
Alan Greenberg
At the last DT teleconference, I was asked to identify subjects/issue that the DT may need to discuss and make recommendations on.
To the best of my knowledge, these seem to be issues that it is essential that we reach consensus on, are not on the agenda of any other DT (except as noted), and reasonably fit into our mandate. To the extent that anyone disagrees, such disagreement should be our first topic for discussion.
Several of these issues were brought to mind by comparable GNSO Operating Procedure. All DT members should look at the GNSO Procedures. Although some do not apply to us, many do. The solution adopted by the GNSO may not fit our needs, but it is far better to reject their solution than to be unaware of its existence. The full GNSO Operating Procedures can be found at http://gnso.icann.org/council/gnso-operating-procedures-22sep11-en.pdf.
To start the discussions, I have put some personal opinions for each issue. These are in double angle brackets preceded by AG: <<AG: Alan's thoughts>>
1. Precedence of rules: Somewhere in out preamble, we need to say that should any conflicts exist between the RoP and ICANN Bylaws, ICANN Bylaws take precedence.
2. Observers: Under what conditions are they allowed and what privileges do they have?
<<AG: With very few exceptions, all ALAC meetings have been open to non-ALAC participants. Generally, subject to ensuring that ALAC members have the opportunity to speak, others present have been allowed to speak as well. Accordingly, perhaps "observer" is not the correct name. Regardless of the name, we need to document what we want to do. Note that details of speaking order and time allocations will be covered by the MADT.>>
3. Absentee voting. For certain crucial issues where votes are taken at meetings, the GNSO allows those not able to vote to contribute their vote within the next few days. Do we want something comparable? It does require pro-active reaching out (by staff) to those not at the meeting.
<<AG: I think this is a good idea. We rarely have full attendance at meetings and this may allow us to get the full 15 votes on issues that are important.>>
4. Proxy voting, whereby one ALAC member who cannot be present at the meeting can give his/her proxy to another ALAC member. The proxy can be either directed, or cast at the discretion of the proxy holder. We would need a formal process for establishing a proxy, possibly including advance deadlines for submission.
<<AG: I support this. I would suggest that a single ALAC member cannot hold more than one proxy for any given vote.>>
5. Temporary Replacements. This would allow an ALAC member who cannot be present to be replaced for a specific meeting. The replacement would have all of the rights of the original member.
<<AG: I have not thought about this a lot, but my instinct is to say I do not support this. I do support ensuring that the missing person's speaking rights could be transferred to another person, but if we adopt some sort of proxy voting, a full replacement is not necessary to ensure that a RALO is well represented and that full votes can be cast. Allowing a full replacement could be viewed as a violation of the ICAN Bylaw definition of ALAC members, and could call into question the validity and meaning of an ALAC vote.>>
6. Statement of Interest. The ALAC now required one for some positions. We need to decide what issues are covered by it and who it applies to. This possibly overlaps with the DMDT.
7. Do we want to include a section in our RoP of minimum standards/rules for RALOs as the GNSO does for Stakeholder Groups and Constituencies?
<<AG: I think that this would be a very good idea, although perhaps difficult to establish just what these standards are. For a start, we could recommend that there be such standards but not try to establish them in detail now.>>
8. Working Group Guidelines. We have talked forever about this but never decided how to go about it, other than to agree that they should be based on the comparable GNSO WG guidelines.
<<AG: I am not sure that it is within our mandate to establish the guidelines, nor do I think we have the time to do so. But we could decide that this is a task that will be completed as a next phase, and allow for these WG procedures within our RoP.
9. Although this overlaps with the MADT, I believe that it is reasonable to this DT to debate what the criteria should be for amendments of the RoP.
<<AG: I support needing more than a simple majority for amendment. Quorum and advance notice of the changes may need to be considered as well.>>
Maureen Hilyard
Because I can't be at the joint meeting this week, I just wanted to add my two cents worth and hope I am not getting out of line here.
The gNSO operating procedures are far more comprehensive than I am assuming that we are wanting to achieve for our own rules of procedure.
Should we be looking at the gNSO model as one that we should aspire to? I hope not because as was mentioned in our last call, ALAC operates so differently from other groups in ICANN. We are a group of grassroots operators who basically just want to get the job of consultation and decision-making done, and we want to be inclusive of the wider group of ALSes (can we change that name for a start!). By being so, any rules that we have, have to be easily understood by the wide range of stakeholder groups we are encouraging to be a part of the organisation. Therefore I don't think that the gNSO model is very appropriate for our members, and would make them feel comfortable about adhering to.
Take for example (from 3.1 Meeting Facilities?) - "provided that ...(b) ICANN adopts and implements means of verifying that a person participating in such a meeting is a member of the GNSO Council or other person entitled to participate in the meeting and all actions of, or votes by, the GNSO Council are taken or cast only by the members of the GMSO Council and not persons who are not members.
If we are going to write anything could we write it in sentences that are easily understood.
eg if you are not a GNSO Council member then you are not entitled to participate in the meeting or to vote.
Why do things have to be so complicated?
On other Boards I have been on, we have followed basic Standing Orders that have been amended to meet the procedural interests of the particular stakeholder group we are representing. Although ALAC has some particular procedural features that it may wish to maintain, I think that we need not get too bogged down with too many rules and regulations.
If much of what we do already is already incorporated into the ICANN bylaws can we just state this at the beginning of our ROP and then get on with what makes us a unique group of decision-makers, and how we make those decisions?
Also, recognising what Hollie mentioned earlier in the first comment about definitions.. just as we need to initially identify what it is that ALAC does and stands for as an introduction to our set of procedures (to give some context to how we want to organise ourselves for what we do, as per Sala above), then I think we also need to use titles, actions and other meeting features consistently.
I have been on a Board that provided a glossary as an appendix to the Standing Orders. This would cut down on the length of the Rules section where explanations generally add to the complexity of the actual statements. Specific words that are found in the glossary are underlined in the text of the rule, and their explanations provided in the appendix that would add to general understandings by everyone... eg ICANN acronyms... as well as general definitions eg the ALAC definition of QUORUM
Our "rules" need to be adaptable, perhaps as a living document. If any other words are raised by members as requiring definition, these could then be underlined and added to the glossary without have to make major changes to the wording of the rule itself. If a rule just isn't working do we have to continue with it?
Have a great joint WG meeting on Monday.. sorry I can't be there. I hope to be able to join you in the ALAC meeting on Tues
Alan Greenberg
Thanks for this Maureen.
You are correct that the GNSO and ALAC are two different beasts. I suspect we will end up with something more detailed than the GNSO operating procedures in some areas, and far less complicated in others. The reason for the former is that we do, from time to time, have to deal with situations where we really need definitive rules (or methodology by which to get them). It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. Personally I would prefer that we build a structure on which the rules can be understood but not try to spell them out in exhausting detail.
Alan
Holly Raiche
Basd on today's DMDT discussion, I have consolidated what Sala did on definitions with the terms that have been used by the DMDT team. While the DMDT group has suggested that there be a definition section at front and a glossary section in the back, I am not clear what would qualify as a defined term and what should go in the glossary section. (My guess is that items such as ALAC, ExCom etc would be in definitions, and terms such as 'consensus' should go in the glossary - but that is for everyone to decide. They are all included here under one heading - we can sort out what goes where. We also need feedback on what is missing.
Definitions
TERMS
DEFINITIONS
COMMENTS
Appointee
A Liaison or Non-Liaison Appointee
Assembly
any meeting or conference, or standing constituent body of the ALAC, as well as any General Assembly sessions of a Regional At-Large Organisation
AGM
ICANN's Annual General Meeting (usually held in the 3rd Quarter – Oct to Dec)
ALAC
At-Large Advisory Committee
ALS
At-Large Structure: An organization certified by the ALAC according to published criteria and standards
ccNSO
Country Code Names Supporting Organization
Consensus
the dominant view of the group, as determined by the Chair
Several suggestions have been made for this – comments welcome
ExCom
Executive Committee of the ALAC, composed of five ALAC members, one from each region (Noting other terms have been suggested)
Do we want to define ALAC Officer separately – if an ALAC Member is on the ExCom, they are an Officer???
gNSO
Generic Names Supporting Organization
ICANN
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Liaison
A person formally representing the ALAC on another body within or outside of ICANN
Member
Member of the ALAC
Motion
A formal proposal made in a deliberative assembly, for example a Motion to adjourn
NOMCOM
ICANN's Nominating Committee
Non-Liaison Appointee
A person selected by the ALAC to represent it or act on its behalf, not bearing the title of Liaison, but otherwise having similar responsibilities.
RALO
Regional At-Large Organization
Resolution
An outcome of decision making; a course of action determined or decided upon
SSAC
ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee
SoI
Statement of Interest
Staff
ICANN support staff identified to work with ALAC and At-Large
Target Group
A group within or outside of ICANN on which an ALAC Appointee sits
Work Group (WG)
Except in the section X (the section describing WGs), the term WG shall mean Work Group, committee, drafting team or any other designation associated with a group of people working together.
Eduardo Diaz
My ideas...
TERMS
DEFINITIONS
COMMENTS
Appointee
A Liaison or Non-Liaison Appointee
Glossary
Assembly
any meeting or conference, or standing constituent body of the ALAC, as well as any General Assembly sessions of a Regional At-Large Organisation
Glossary
AGM
ICANN's Annual General Meeting (usually held in the 3rd Quarter – Oct to Dec)
Definition
ALAC
At-Large Advisory Committee
Definition
ALS
At-Large Structure: An organization certified by the ALAC according to published criteria and standards
Definition: At-Large Structure
Glossary: An organization certified by the ALAC according to published criteria and standards
ccNSO
Country Code Names Supporting Organization
Definition
Consensus
the dominant view of the group, as determined by the Chair
Several suggestions have been made for this – comments welcome
---0---
Glossary
ExCom
Executive Committee of the ALAC, composed of five ALAC members, one from each region (Noting other terms have been suggested)
Do we want to define ALAC Officer separately – if an ALAC Member is on the ExCom, they are an Officer???
---0---
Definition: Executive Committee
Glossary: Executive Committee of the ALAC, composed of five ALAC members, one from each region
gNSO
Generic Names Supporting Organization
Definition
ICANN
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
Definition
Liaison
A person formally representing the ALAC on another body within or outside of ICANN
Glossary
Member
Member of the ALAC
Glossary
Motion
A formal proposal made in a deliberative assembly, for example a Motion to adjourn
Glossary
NOMCOM
ICANN's Nominating Committee
Definition
Non-Liaison Appointee
A person selected by the ALAC to represent it or act on its behalf, not bearing the title of Liaison, but otherwise having similar responsibilities.
Glossary
RALO
Regional At-Large Organization
Definition
Resolution
An outcome of decision making; a course of action determined or decided upon
Glossary
SSAC
ICANN Security and Stability Advisory Committee
Definition
SoI
Statement of Interest
Definition
Staff
ICANN support staff identified to work with ALAC and At-Large
Glossary
Target Group
A group within or outside of ICANN on which an ALAC Appointee sits
Glossary
Work Group (WG)
Except in the section X (the section describing WGs), the term WG shall mean Work Group, committee, drafting team or any other designation associated with a group of people working together.
Definition: Work Group (Note: this is in the case the abbreviation WG is used)
Salanieta Tamanikaiwaimaro
The term "Resolution" should show the distinctions between an ExCom Resolution, an ALAC resolution, a RALO Resolution and also the ICANN Board Resolution.