Independent Examiner’s Final Recommendation | At-Large should remove the current criteria for At-Large membership, notably the requirement to join an ALS in order to become an active policy contributor to the At-Large Community. All internet end-users with an interest in ICANN’s policy development function or outreach should be able to become involved in the activities of At-Large in the same way. |
Issue Identified | |
Does ALAC Support Recommendation? | Support with qualification. As with all EMM-related recommendations, acceptance is in relation to the intent and not the EMM-specific implementation. |
If Not, Please Provide Reasoning. | The ALAC strongly supports the ability of users to participate in At-Large without the need for joining or forming and ALS. Three of the five regionals already have such an ability as a status quo, and the ALAC and the RALOS are committed to ensuring that this is extended to all five regions, regardless of implementation of the EMM. Some regions have raised the need to place some restrictions to ensure that users support the principles of At-Large and do not use the At-Large persona to campaign for anti-user issues (something that HAS happened in the past). With regard to the wording of the recommendation, it implies that the ONLY mechanism for At-Large Membership is through the the ALS, a statement that the ITEMS team understood was incorrect for several RALOs. Looking at the EMM model proposed, it is unclear what the mechanism will be by which users will become informed of the EMM, and what it is that will motivate them to begin spending significant time and effort to participate in ICANN policy issues (including learning the vernacular, getting up to speed on the issues in question and expending significant time on a regular basis). The presence of a personal vote seems to be a critical part of this, since it is that which largely differentiates the EMM from the individual unaffiliated members that three of the five RALOs have, and the other two are committed to allow. But this vote is only allotted after demonstration of active participation. It is unclear who will judge such participation and how this will be done. Such metrics have been an issue that At-Large has been grappling with for years and is not a minor implementation issue. If a possible vote is the critical issue in motivating people to engage, then one has to question their overall commitment. Moreover, since some RALOs rarely if ever have votes, one has to question whether the EMM would work if voting is a critical issue. |
If ALAC Does Not Support Recommendation, Does It Suggest an Alternative Recommendation? If so, please provide a suggested alternative Recommendation. | |
Prioritization | High Priority |
At-Large Comments | The ALAC is committed to fully utilizing the contributions of At-Large Members not affiliated with an ALS. Moreover, discussions are starting on how to ensure that such members have equitable access to travel opportunities such as GAs and ATLAS. For the regions that already have individual unaffiliated members, they already have access to other ICANN travel opportunities. |
Possible Dependencies | Although it is desirable to have the rules and process as uniform as possible across regions, the ALAC is aware of the cultural and other differences and understands that complete uniformity may not be possible. |
Who Will Implement? | At-Large leadership, RALOs, ICANN Staff |
Resource Requirements | Volunteer time to develop procedure for individual membership applications, staff resources for processing those applications |
Budget Effects impact? | |
Implementation Timeline | |
Proposed Implementation Steps |
AT-LARGE GATEWAY
At-Large Regional Policy Engagement Program (ARPEP)
At-Large Review Implementation Plan Development
4 Comments
Alan Greenberg
My thoughts
Status: Accept with qualification. As with all EMM-related recommendations, acceptance is in relation to the intent and not the EMM-specific implementation.
Comment: The ALAC strongly supports the ability of users to participate in At-Large without the need for joining or forming and ALS. Three of the five regionals already have such an ability, and the ALAC and the RALOS are committed to ensuring that this is extended to all five regions.
Although it is desirable to have the rules and process as uniform as possible across regions, the ALAC is aware of the cultural and other differences and understands that complete uniformity may not be possible.
Aida Noblia
The end users of the Internet have two possibilities of integrating themselves into the work of At Large: 1. as part of a team, through an ALs, in which they already comprise a related group, previously constituted for their action in civil society, with different purposes. This is an opportunity that allows them to better integrate, participate in a group with which they are familiar, in which they know many of their members and who have idiosyncracies and common goals. For At Large, it is also important as these associations can be a source of new active members coming from them. 2. However, people who are not previously integrated into any organization can participate individually as already stated, in three of the five RALOs being in management some details of their integration in the remaining two. Few people have opted for the second option even in the three RALOS that admit it and have it regulated.
Ariel Liang
ALAC comment in the ALAC Statement on the At-Large Review Draft Report
==
It is unclear what the mechanism will be by which users will become informed of the EMM, and what it is that will motivate them to begin spending significant time and effort to participate in ICANN policy issues (including learning the vernacular, getting up to speed on the issues in question and expending significant time on a regular basis).
The presence of a personal vote seems to be a critical part of this, since it is that which largely differentiates the EMM from the individual unaffiliated members that three of the five RALOs have, and the other two are committed to allow. But this vote is only allotted after demonstration of active participation. It is unclear who will judge such participation and how this will be done. Such metrics have been an issue that At-Large has been grappling with for years and is not a minor implementation issue. If a possible vote is the critical issue in motivating people to engage, then one has to question their overall commitment. Moreover, since some RALOs rarely if ever have votes, one has to question whether the EMM would work if voting is a critical issue.
**
This is the status quo for three of the five regions and will eventually be the case for all regions, regardless of implementation of the EMM. Some regions have raised the need to place some restrictions to ensure that users support the principles of At-Large and do not use the At-Large persona to campaign for anti-user issues (something that HAS happened in the past).
Vanda Scartezini
we are already doing this in the regions, as in LACRALO, the individuals are not allowed to participate per si.