• No labels


  1. Open Discussion of Conflict Within RALOs.

    Since being elected to Chair of NARALO it has come to my attention that various disputes exist between members of the community. It was my hope in joining this volunteer community that we could see past our differences to the common goal of improving the Internet infrastructure. However, I should not be surprised that within any large group personalities will clash, agendas will collide, and politics will show its ugly face.

    In general, I am concerned that we need to refocus on our intended purpose as a policy drafting body and advisory. If we get bogged-down in internal disputes we lose the mission.

    Sometimes issues within a RALO among its members may be difficult to resolve because disputes involve the members themselves. So, to address this I am prepared to discuss how members from outside one RALO can help mediate conflict within another RALO if needed. Because At-Large members from a different RALO have no standing in the internal dispute of another RALO, they may be able to offer unbiased advice. This is exactly the kind of role I imagine a Cross-RALO group taking on.

    We can talk about general approaches on the call that will hopefully translate to meaningful discourse in Toronto.

  2. Apologies to the Secretariat for the very poor sound quality on Adobe Connect (26 Sep). I suspect it is our system in the Cooks. I can hear clearly what is being said, but cannot upload. And my phone connections kept cutting out too. Thanks to Silvia and Heidi for their summaries. Just to add..

    The purpose of the METRICS group is to develop metrics for ALAC and as Heidi mentioned we are also doing a review of APRALO documentation, therefore I will be taking note of metrics that arise out of the decisions that are made about the ALAC to be transferred to our review of APRALO documentation. It is hoped that perhaps other RALOS may consider this as well. 

    Because of the complexity and sensitivity of the issues relating to evaluation of performance of people who are volunteers, but It is important that people who put themselves forward for a position on the ALAC are aware that their appointment does impose responsibilities and accountability.For this reason, it is the responsibility of the group to review the metrics that are listed in Rule 21.

    In order to do this, it is important that we take the discussion to our Secretariats and RALOs and to get some feedback. At the moment the quantitative aspects of participation are recorded, but the qualitative aspects are a little more difficult. Attending a meeting, and participating, are seen as separate metrics items. How do we appropriately measure participation or performance?

    Similarly, someone who may not actively participate in meetings, but may be an active member of working group activities, so there has to be some balance in what we are measuring across the many responsibilities that ALAC members have, and the activities in which they are involved. 

    For this reason it is really important that we gather information from Secretariats and RALOs to help us with this task.  It is also assuming that all our ALSes are aware of what the ALAC does so that they can appropriately comment on the metrics. 

    We would like to know what kind of information RALOS would like to know from these metrics, and how they would like this information reported back to them. 

    But if you can assist us with any feedback we'd really appreciate it. Many thanks in advance.