The Unaffiliated Individuals Mobilization Working Party will make a recommendation to the ALAC on what needs to be done to allow the full implementation of changes in support of unaffiliated individuals' participation in At-Large in accordance with the plans proposed under Issue #2 of the At-Large Organizational Review as approved by the ICANN Board of Directors on 23 June 2018 and 27 January 2019.
The participants (both voting Members and non-voting Participants) of this working group are subscribed to the Unaffiliated Individuals Mobilization Working Party Mailing list. To subscribe to the mailing list (or read the archives / manage your subscription) please visit: https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/ui-mob-wp
Staff Support Leads: Heidi Ullrich
Mailing list: email@example.com
The members of Unaffiliated Individuals Members Working Party, organized by regional affiliation, are:
|Region||Name||ALS Representative / Individual Member/ Leadership||ALAC/RALO Appointed Members and Participants|
|Roberto Gaetano (Chair)|
|ALAC Chair||Maureen Hilyard|
|AFRALO||Sarah Kiden||ALS Representative / RALO Leadership (AFRALO Secretary)||Member/RALO Appointed|
|AFRALO||Caleb Olumuyiwa Ogundele||ALS Representative||Member/RALO Appointed|
|AFRALO||Seun Ojedeji||ALS Representative / RALO Leadership (AFRALO Chair)||Participant|
|AFRALO||Esther Patricia Akello||RALO Appointed||Member/RALO Appointed|
|AFRALO||Abdulkarim Oloyede||AFRALO ALAC Member||Participant|
|APRALO||Nadira Al-Araj||ALS Representative||Member/RALO Appointed|
|APRALO||Justine Chew||Unaffiliated Individual/ APRALO ALAC Member|
Member/APRALO ALAC Member
|APRALO||Hanan Khatib||APRALO Unaffiliated Individual Representative||Member/RALO Appointed|
|APRALO/EURALO||Narine Khachatryan||Individual Observer||Participant|
|EURALO||Natalia Filina||Unaffiliated Individual / RALO Leadership (EURALO Secretary)||Member/RALO Appointed|
|EURALO||Yrjö Länsipuro||ALS Representative||Member/RALO Appointed|
|EURALO||Matthias M. Hudobnik||ALAC Leadership (EURALO ALAC Member)||Member/EURALO ALAC Member|
|LACRALO||Laura Margolis||Unaffiliated Individual/RALO Appointed||Member/RALO Appointed|
|LACRALO||Alejandro Pisanty||ALS Representative||Member/RALO Appointed|
|LACRALO||Carlos Raúl Gutiérrez||ALAC Leadership (LACRALO ALAC Member)||Member/LACRALO ALAC Member|
|NARALO||Eduardo Diaz||ALS Representative / RALO Leadership (NARALO Chair)||Participant|
|NARALO||Jonathan Zuck||ALS Representative / ALAC Leadership (NARALO ALAC Member)||Member/NARALO ALAC Member|
|NARALO||David Mackey||Unaffiliated Individual||Member/RALO Appointed|
|NARALO||Judith Hellerstein||ALS Representative / RALO Leadership (NARALO Secretary)||Member/RALO Appointed|
|NARALO||Bill Jouris||Unaffiliated Individual||Participant|
Next Call: 15 March 2021
Last Call: 01 March 2021
Unaffiliated Individuals Mobilization Working Party Report - Final Report, 19 March 2021 See: ALAC Ratification
Unaffiliated Individuals Mobilization Working Party Report -Final Draft Report - Comments accepted through 14 March 2021
Unaffiliated Individuals Mobilization Plan Working Documents
Individual Membership RoP Summary Table
RALO MOUs, ICANN BY LAWS: Articles on membership and accreditation/certification procedures
/* Excerpted from my mail dated Sep 9, 2020, 9:22 AM */
My quick submissions:
People seldom work in any organization without any motives, purposes or thinking. They do not usually
work in an impulsive manner.
The individual's identification with the organization is stronger if a number of individual needs are satisfied in it,
the organization goals are perceived as shared, the prestige of the organization is perceived to be the greater,
there is greater frequency of interaction in the organization and there is less competition within the organization
[This is fine for UIM is across organizations and across geographical regions].
The success of an organization depends not only on the proper coordination and cooperation of its members
but also on the cooperation of others.
For the UIM:
The equilibrium is more likely to happen when the basic vision and mission of UIM are shared and an Statement of Purpose [SOP]
is submitted by the individual [those not named explicitly in the ALS application].
/* Excerpt Ends */
/* Excerpted from my mail dated Oct 6, 2020, 1:34 PM */
At the outset, I wish to reiterate that only time is the constraint for the active participation in
many professional activities that have always been happening. Therefore, within the set of constraints
of available time, how does one maximize the contribution [voluntary] to the activity ?
This is the primary motivation for groups / teams. ALS is a structured and reasonably regulated team formation.
It is not the problem we are attempting to fix. . It is a policy we are working on to enable us to specify a wider canvas of furthering the progress of
"an Individual" irrespective of the affiliation if any.
Individuals for UIM are one who is keen on pooling back wider perspectives into the context of work. With a focus on "Individual", I see three major types.
***Individual from the community***. [Absolutely No Affiliation Whatsoever]
There are a significant number of them who are doing things for doing sake. These Individuals are almost completely defined by the groups
they come from. The language, religion, all kinds of values and other customs define an Individual based on the community they come from.
These things play a much bigger part than we normally think in defining who an individual is. They are influencers of a local context.
***Individuals from an ALS *** [Outside of those named in the Application to ICANN]
The distinction is to assure "Separation of Concerns" only. ALS is more regulated and structured and has
more bandwidth for furthering certain types of activities of ICANN. To my mind most ALSs have their own
Agendas and they also do some programmes - typically awareness programs. It is like a non-formal education
model where ICANN authorizes the ALSs on these programmes. Individuals as segregated do contribute
further and pool in their experiences.
***Individuals Working in a Different Organization in a Country / Region ***
I think that this type of individuals need to be mobilized ASAP in greater numbers. This category is a direct
interface to the organization and many things are easily understood as "Tailorability" of ICANN Governance
procedures and practices for the organization. The framework of operation is more robust and has very high
longevity than ALS or the community.
An Indian Author Minoo Masani wrote a collection of essays titled "“Our Growing Human Family”. One of the
essays is titled "No Man is an Island". Likewise, No machine is an Island. It helps to have one individual
ICANN representative form an organization.
In general, the goal is "separation of concerns". Conflict is a rarity.
UIM can facilitate a wider degree of possibilities both within an organization and / or ALS and can enable the individual to reason it out
and pool it all into ALS and / or Organization. UIM builds Individuals who contribute to the Organization and / or ALS where they belong.
It is usually the individual who thinks, reason and acts. Individual knows how to satisfy the wants. Any group of individuals always have
the potential both for order and chaos. Structuring helps in getting focus on the goals. IMHO, UIM is a structure that brings in broader
perspectives from across the globe that can benefit an ALS or an Organization.
I am not mooting changes in the existing rules and regulations. I am attempting a vision and mission for UIM.
/* Excerpt Ends */
Gopal T V
Mandatory Data Localization
Mandatory data localization refers to government requirements that control the storage and flow of data to keep it within a particular jurisdiction. Data localization laws – sometimes called “data residency” or “data sovereignty” – are typically intended to keep personal or financial transaction data in-country where they are subject to access and local regulation. Mandatory data localization measures range from obligations to physically locate data in the country where it originates, to restricting or even forbidding its transfer to other countries.
This helps in "Incident Response".
The Internet is a “network of networks”, made up of almost 70,000 independent networks that use the same technical protocols and choose to collaborate and connect together. Each network makes independent decisions on how to route traffic to its neighbours, based on its own needs, business model, and local requirements. There is no centralized control or coordination.
Hence, I humbly suggest that we have a UIM fixed with one set of co-ordinates. On a per case basis special requests may be looked into the concerned committee.
Gopal T V
Making a Case for Using the Term "Unaffiliated"
"Unaffiliated" not closely associated with, belonging to, or subordinate to another.
Collective action literature tends to focus on how people are affiliated to mobilizing structures and on how being affiliated to these networks facilitates collective action participation. Much less attention is given to the fact that sometimes large proportions of the participants are not affiliated to the organizers’ networks.
"Unaffiliated", I think is a well nurtured distinction in ICANN At - Large. We should strive to foster this.
All along the discussions in our group, we are trying to answer the questions:
How are the Unaffiliated members mobilized?
What is their collective identity?
What is their motivation?
In a study on "Demonstrations" against something, it was found that on an average 51% of the demonstrators are "Unaffiliated" !!
Collective action refers to any action that individuals undertake as group members to pursue group goals such as social change. Integrating who “we” are with what “we” (will not) stand for is a challenge that is addressed in the most unambiguous manner using the term "Unaffiliated".
When "Unaffiliated" individuals assimilate new information, they incorporate it into an already existing framework without changing that framework. This always makes the process of "assimilation" lean on all the stakeholders of the Working Party. "Unaffiliated" fosters "Independence of a higher degree" i.e makes way for "Independent Individuals" and actions that shape the destiny of the community over a span of time.
This may occur when "Unaffiliated" individuals' experiences are aligned with their internal representations of the world, but may also occur as a failure to change a faulty understanding; for example, they may not notice events, may misunderstand input from others, or may decide that an event is a "flash in the pan / fluke" and is therefore unimportant as information about the world. Also, when Unaffiliated individuals' experiences contradict their internal representations, they may change their perceptions of the experiences to fit their internal representations. Both these are simpler to analyze and comprehend.
The idea of UIM in ICANN At - Large is unique and needs to be fostered by all of us.
IMPORTANT NOTE: As on date i.e 30 November 2020, the status is:
An individual Internet user may join the At-Large community independently without being a member of an At-Large Structure (ALS). They are called individual members (or unaffiliated members), and the terms and conditions can differ from Regional At-Large Organization (RALO) to RALO. Four RALOs, AFRALO, APRALO, EURALO and NARALO, have official procedures accepting individual members unaffiliated with accredited ALSes. The LACRALO is currently developing their individual member acceptance procedure.
Gopal T V
I recall back at Singapore (ICANN 44?) when I raised the issue on the roles of NGOs and got no feedback, and the low but seemingly politics during the transition and the wide diversification on discussing membership, one needed to be careful while reporting so as not to assume a role that you had not been designated. At-Large is building a door of openness that would ensure key roles become active indices towards process and objective achievement of all structures.
Adebunmi Adeola Akinbo.
Collective action problems are a unique family of puzzles in ethics & law about what people do together. These puzzles pervade our modern and globalized world. Individuals with "Moral Autonomy" do influence the community. However, even though there is nothing wrong about the action of a given individual, the action can lead to a collective harm. Also, even when expected benefits do not happen, there may be nothing wrong about the action of a given individual. There are very many ethical and legal reasons why Individuals do not participate in the production of collective harms even if they are only perceptions. "Unaffiliated Individual Member" is a unique aspect of ICANN At - Large to make these individuals tick until an opportune moment happens to produce "positive outcomes" in a given community. BTW, in India, ALS is akin to an NGO mentioned by Adebunmi Adeola Akinbo. There are some notable theories and logics of Collective Action. We may need a few "binders" such as an application and approval process to assure Ethics. Your comments are most welcome.
I find visiting the following link very useful for our discussions.,
Regionalism is a closely related idea to "Collective Action". Regionalism has been called a manifestation of "World Federalism" and an intermediate stage between administrative decentralization and federalism. "Region" is a basic concept for understanding local areas and global systems. ICANN has "Geographical Regions". The "Collective Action" influences and is influenced by "Geopolitics". The purpose of a Region may thus be kept away from the functionality of an "Unaffiliated Individual". The term Unaffiliated is also apt in the context of a Region.
- Dr. T V Gopal
On Decision by Voting:
Most of the time, decisions are made to prevent stalling progress. At least one in the team may feel guilty of not using the best decision making method in the workplace.
Consensus is by far the most time consuming and least risk method for decision making.
Voting is slightly better on time and risk and somehow the belief is that (debatably) it is a few shades away from Consensus as a method.
To be candid, simply saying that "Due to Paucity of Time, I am happy to leave to the Chair" is a sort of vote. Unfortunately, this has become too frequent in many meetings even when they are fully formal. The grade of trust is not what is being looked into in this context. It is longevity of a decision made by a collective.
Also, in theory, the greater the heterogeneity of the voting population, the larger the sample has to be in order to produce an accurate estimate of voting behavior.
"Decision by Consultation" increases risk as in the final analysis the questions related to who was consulted always remain and decisions are traceable to an individual.
"Command / Order" is maximum risk and minimum time.
Thanks to the preference for "Democratic" means, Voting became quite appealing. Coming from a Government Organization in India, I think that there can be three rounds of discussion and if consensus does not happen by then, voting is a viable option.
In the case of UIM - WP discussions, I do thing that those who are officially with an ALS Application are not UIM. The others in the ALS can on their own volition become UIM of the pertinent RALO. I have expressed by opinions on the need for such UIM and justification.
However, there is only "One" vote from all UIMs in a RALO. This appears queer in my mind.
Clearly, "No Vote" for UIMs is not my choice.
Is there an election method for (nominating / electing / selecting) the "Voting UIM" from among the UIMs in a RALO ?
If it is there it may be fine. In any case, the number of UIMs who actually vote is not much. On record, we have at least one vote from the UIM collective. This ought to be fine in both the cases that the UIM with voting right agrees / disagrees with the ALS to who the individual may belong or not with any ALS.
One more choice for consideration: Dotmocracy
Dotmocracy is an established facilitation option for collecting and recognizing levels of agreement on written statements among a large number of people.
Dotmocracy is based on a simple assumption: If you ask many people to discuss and brainstorm the same questions, at least one of them will eventually give
an answer that the rest will agree with or can at least accept.
The voters can put a dot on as many choices as they desire. The one with maximum dots is the decision.
Gopal T V
I wish to place on record, my heartfelt thanks to all the members of the UIM - WP and Dr. Roberto Gaetano for this challenging exercise in framing a set of policies without much of concrete data to really anchor the policies across the globe. This has been my SOI specific to this work.
<Edit: 19 January 2021>
There is a need to maintain the "Bounce History" on the mail Ids provided by the Individual Users at the time of becoming the members. In my humble opinion, this is the best handle for any judgment from the ICANN Offices.
The quirks of the Networking world are such that, where possible there should be a provision for "Regret Window", "Benefit of Doubt" and "Deferred Action". "Deferred Action" can involve specific expertise if applicable.
"Loose Lips Sink Ships" is a well noted US World War II Propaganda Poster. There is a degree of inevitability of forming "Silent Majority" in matters of Security and therefore "Cyber Security" as well. In any case the typical governing maxim in politics is "Safety through Majority" and "Perks for Minority" as applicable in a specific geographical area. Politicians can then readily perceive the tasks hopefully even in the Cyberspace. For the Individual Members also, "Silent Majority" may help in avert "Whistle Blowing Contexts" and "Accumulating Evidence within the machinery either with or without their knowledge".
Your comments are most welcome.
Gopal T V