Objective:  At the recent meeting as Barcelona, each RALO has been tasked with ascertaining its regional policy priorities through a bottom-up consultative process (through a short survey). The priorities identified through this process will be aggregated with those from the other regions and used as input to various initiatives such as the CPWG, ATLAS3 planning, and Capacity Building.


Reference: APRALO 2017 Hot Topics 

Mailing List: apralo-hot-topics@icann.org 

Working Group Members
Satish BabuAmir QayyumAnupam AgrawalHanan KhatibMaheeshwara KirindigodaShreedeep Rayamajhi
Amal Ramzi Al-saqqafAmrita ChoudhuryCheryl Landon-OrrIndrajit DeNadira AL-ArajStanley Osao
Amer Al-SubaiAnju MangalFouad BajwaJustine ChewPriyatosh JanaJahangir Hossain

APRALO HOT TOPICS SURVEY SUMMARY 2019


APRALO Priority Topics

Working group scope of work:

Do the WG wanted to restrict the survey on ICANN policy with relevance to APRALO region? <CLO> no I prefer wider over narrower focus.

Do the WG wanted the survey to cover APRALO Policy Hot topics in general? <CLO> confused is that not the purpose of our work???
<NA> We mean here non ICANN general Internet Governance related issues.

Do the WG wanted to find what ALSes wants from APRALO on other Internet related issues? <CLO>  may as well.

Timeline to end this task? <CLO> ASAP to run the Survey between Dec sometime and say end of January. 2019.

(Nadira) Note to the WG members: Please write you name before any text you are adding.

Preliminary suggested questions and topics for the survey by {Satish and Nadira}

  • ALS Name (if applicable):
  • APRALO membership:

APRALO/ALAC leadership

ALS leader

ALS individual member

Member of ALS

APRALO observer

  • Country:
  • ICANN Policy priorities in relevance to APRALO:

Domain Name Policy Areas

Geographical names

Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice

Anti-abuse

 Technical Topics

DNS Security and abuse

Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Universal Acceptance

DNSSEC

 Cross community topics

New gTLD Subsequent Rounds

gTLD Registration Data (EPDP)

* ICANN's Accountability and Transparency


  •  Capacity Building

* Schools of Internet Governance (APSIG, APIGA, National Schools)

Training and mentoring ALS in Public policy drafting and commenting.

  • Internet related issues:

Internet Governance issues  

Some suggestions to add to the list:

* Human Rights

* Privacy/Data Protection/Surveillance/Censorship

* Extra-territorial jurisdiction of DP legislation (?)

* Diversity (of all kinds)

* The Internet Governance Ecosystem (expanding on RIRs/IETF)

 New Trends and its impact on Domain Names

IoT

Blockchain

OTT

AI/ML

Dark Web/Onion Routing

  • No labels

19 Comments

  1. Comments provided by Satish Babu 

    3. For reference, here are links to the AFRALO and EURALO policy hot topics and our own list from 2017 Nov:

    https://community.icann.org/display/AFRALO/AFRALO+Hot+Topics?preview=/69272809/84218840/AFRALO%20Hot%20Topics%20Report%202018%20-%20Final.pdf

    https://community.icann.org/display/EURALO/EURALO+Hot+Topics+2017?preview=/69279487/74583103/EUROPEAN%20REGIONAL%20AT-LARGE%20ORGANIZATION%20(EURALO)%20HOT%20TOPICS%202017.pdf

    https://community.icann.org/display/APRALO/APRALO+Hot+topics+2017

    I note that there is no consistent framework and each RALO follows its own way, which may be an issue when collating/aggregating results from all five RALOs later.


    Comment provided by Justine Chew

     I think what we need to work on are one-liner descriptions for each topic to provide some clarity or focus to what we're talking about.

    Comment provided by Amrita Choudhury

    Post training it is important to handhold and mentor interested community member to draft or comment in policies.

    1. I agree with Justine Chew comments here that a one liner description will allow to provide clarity and provide perspective to the respondent on why is the choice given.

      In the same thought, I felt that while selecting the priority for any listed topic, if a box for reason is provided wherein the respondent writes a line, few words , it will allow the working group to get insight on the selection. 

      1. Thank you @Anupam Agrawal for your support. Please feel free to add the description as you find suitable and I will reflect that on the survey. I also encourage others to chime in.
  2. Nadira Alaraj how do I view the whole questionnaire in the google form? Currently if I want to go to the next page in the form I can only proceed after filling up the first sheet.

    1. Thank you Amrita, I removed the required field from the survey. We can determine which questions are required later.
  3. To speed up the work, I reflected the preliminary points from the WIKI in a Google Form /survey  in  the following link.
    https://goo.gl/forms/ZcpcASinaoV8wh0b2 
    Please note, that those questions are not in anyway the final questions, 
    It will be up the WG to decided on the topics and then on the style of the questions in the survey.

    In the wiki page that Satish had mentioned in his email, there are questions at the beginning of the page that will help us determine the scope of our work. We appreciate your input on this regards as well. 

    Once we finalized the questions, I would like to ask if you support the idea of reaching beyond APAC-Discuss list to all ALSes members? my reasoning that when reaching out to our communities we are engaging them or their input of their expectation from APRALO.

    Following Satish's timeline, I would like to suggest the below schedule.

    - Dec 3rd  - Sunday Dec 9th,  Finalize the survey  questions and its scope 
    - Dec 10 - Dec 14 circulate the survey
    - Dec 14th send the reminder of the survey
    - Dec  17th the closing day of receiving responses to the survey
    - Dec 18-19th compiling and tabulating the responses (unfortunately it is less than 2 weeks)
    - Dec 20th to present the finding at December monthly meeting for discussion. 
    - Dec 20- 22 incorporate the discussion points in the final report.

  4. OK  in the absence of having any comment/editability to the GForm... I am capturing my comments and observations/edit suggests here instead....


    Re Your APRALO membership

    APRALO/ALAC leadership

    ALS leader

    ALS individual member

    ALS General Assembly member   <CLO>  I assume what is actually meant for this label is APRALO General Assembly (Individual) member 

    APRALO observer

    *************

    under the Topics sections

    Anti-abuse    <CLO>  of what?  Am I to assume it is of the DNS???


    Training and mentoring ALS in Public policy drafting and commenting.  <CLO>  I assume what is actually meant for this is better listed as Training and mentoring in contributions to ICANN Public policy drafting and commenting. 


    Extra-territorial jurisdiction of DP legislation <CLO>  I encourage us to always use Full words where possible (EN is a second language for many in our Region)  so please use Data Protection... same for the rest of the Survey following this point.

    *****************


    Finally, I would like to see this survey take the opportunity to explore interest in the Implementation and Development of recommendations from the At-Large Review for our Region and related to this engagement with ATLAS III...

    So perhaps a Yes No Maybe Question such as

    • Are you interested in contributing to Regionally focussed discussions and actions relating to the implementation of relevant outcomes from the recent At-Large Review?
    • Are you considering applying to be a supported traveller to attend the next ATLAS III meeting late in 2019?



    1. Thank you Cheryl for your valuable input, I thought the WG members are able to edit the wiki page, but all means including reply to emails are possible. The intention of "ALS General Assembly member" is asking ALS leaders to disseminate this survey to their general assembly. My ask about the apac-discuss list. Is there APRALO GA individual members? Who are they? Are they previous ALS primary contacts like my case, but I can check the ALS GA member. Or could they be APRALO observers who doesn't belong to any ALS and never applied to be an APRALO ALS individual member. In this case, if I'm no more an ALS GA member I can still be APRALO GA individual member. Maybe this survey will identify those members and ask them to apply to be an ALS individual member. Thanks also for your comments on the other questions that I will reflect later in both the G Form and the Wiki.
    2. It is definitely worth to explore interest in the implementation and development of recommendations from the At-Large review. An Additional Proposed Question - In what ways, the engagement of ALSes can be increased?

  5. Nadira, I can edit just about any wiki page but not everyone can, or is comfortable doing so... However, my comments were specific to Google Form version as questions for the survey.

     Let me address a couple of your points though... And these are also now reflected in reply to questions posed in the wiki page body text <CLO> where relevant. 

    The intention of "ALS General Assembly member" is asking ALS leaders to disseminate this survey to their general assembly. <CLO> one can but try but "general assembly" will be an unknown term to many ALSes if we want them to pass it to their rank and file membership we ask them to pass it on to their 'Members'.

    My ask about the apac-discuss list. Is there APRALO GA individual members? Who are they? Are they previous ALS primary contacts like my case, but I can check the ALS GA member. Or could they be APRALO observers who doesn't belong to any ALS and never applied to be an APRALO ALS individual member.  <CLO> apac-discuss list has/can have all of those, however to my knowledge very few non Contact Persons for an ALS are usually subscribers, but the best way is to look at the actual list of subscribers.  Staff can assist us with having someone do that and an analysis (even if it is best-guess) comparing known ALS Contacts and Ind Members with the list.  

    In this case, if I'm no more an ALS GA member I can still be APRALO GA individual member. Maybe this survey will identify those members and ask them to apply to be an ALS individual member.   <CLO> Again I would avoid using the term General Assembly other than in the context of a RALO wide convocation event. A Member of an ALS can't hold Individual Membership in our RALO concurrently, and I note there are sometimes reasons why an Individual may not wish to join a local ALS to contribute to our Regional work in ICANN  or ICANNs work directly.

  6. Hi Nadira

    Taking into account Cheryl's comments as well as other comments, I'd suggest we simplify the first question and make it a no-brainer. Here are two questions from the last APRALO survey (2017 Membership Capability survey) :

    Q. What is your membership status?

    • I am a representative of a member ALS of APRALO
    • I am an accredited individual member
    • Other (Pls specify)*

    Q. Name of your ALS (if you are an ALS Representative)

    *  The "Other (Pls specify)" is my suggestion to capture all other cases. We had not carried this option the last time


  7. Apologies, I have been inundated with other work and have not had too much spare time to dwell on this exercise.

    I will however find some time soon to pursue my earlier suggestion of including a one-liner to frame each of the topics listed (some of them, at least). Cheryl's comment about "anti-abuse" shows exactly why I think the one-liners are necessary (on top of tweaking topic names to hit the mark better), Another example is "Human Rights" which is a huge advocacy realm in itself! So maybe we should try to be more specific about the areas of Human Rights which have the strongest connection to what ICANN does?

    That aside, what is an "ALS Individual Member"? I am an individual member of APRALO unaffiliated to any ALS because (as Cheryl correctly points out) as an individual member I cannot be associated with any ALS. Also use of "General Assembly" has little relevance IMO. So I would opt for the simplified membership status questions that Satish has presented.

  8. Sorry, for not being able to respond earlier, 

    Much tanks to Cheryl Langdon-OrrSatish BabuAnupam AgrawalJustine Chewfor your recent inputs.

    I tried to take into consideration Satish's previous survey questions and Cheryl's elaborated explanation and formulated the question about the membership as follows:

    Your APRALO/RALO Membership Status

    • APRALO/ALAC Leader
    • ALS Representative Member of APRALO
    • Accredited ALS Individual Member
    • ALS Member
    • Other {I'm sorry Satish, I couldn't edit the "Other" to add  "Please Specify"}

    I did some changes in the style to some of the survey questions that was before reading through Justine's comments. 

    Dear all, 

    Here is the Link to the Google form where anyone with the following link can edit it.  Please, @Justine, and others who wanted to add/edit more detailed description just chime in  

    https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12CREhNUXGUChJksUQD_T1NhwerGfB4p0ZlltfhForUU/edit?usp=sharing

    If you only wanted to view the survey you can use the following link.

    https://goo.gl/forms/0fzZSeXTWKUjoXp73


    I have another question with regards to soliciting topics that are non-ICANN related issues? They are in the survey, from my personal view, it is better to narrow APRALO Hot Topics to Policies with relation to ICANN. 

  9. In the survey form can we ask for issues like what are the challenges for policy process involvement and engagement .
    If we have those challenges then it can spark really good discussion and highlight the issues .

    Just my two cent thought 

  10. I apologize for not being able to contribute during the week, and today with the beginning of the weekend, I read your discussion in the wiki and in the mailing list and found you're done with the survey. It looks good , thank you all! and I hope I can contribute in the coming steps of delivering the survey and tabulating the responses.

    1. Thanks for getting back to us, Amal.

      No issues in not being able to contribute on account of workload...you can still support the initiative by:

      1. Getting community members to respond to the survey, once it is released.

      2. By helping out with comments during the next phase, when we tabulate the responses.
  11. Hi All,

    After closing the survey, and removing the duplicate responses, we have 30 respondents. 

    The topics that got the higher priorities could be considered APRALO hot topics

    They are:

    • DNSSEC including DNS Security and Abuse (24 respondents)
    • ICANN's Accountability and Transparency (20 respondents)
    • Internationalized Domain Names (IDNs) and Universal Acceptance (19 respondents)
    • Competition, Consumer Trust and Consumer Choice (17 respondents)
    • Geographic Names gTLDs (17 respondents)

    The file attached is the summary of the survey that I put together because the Google Form pdf file summary was not clear. 

     We need some of the group member to compile the written responses. 

  12. Thanks very much, Nadira. IMO, the results look reasonably consistent with our informal perceptions.


    While the graphs are useful to be presented at our next monthly call, we may also need the tabulated numbers for passing on to ALAC.

  13. Here I'm uploading the file with the tabulated numbers

    and also the raw responses as per Google Form.