Page History

[
h2. draft_alac_pd_rework[hide|https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?draft_alac_pd_rework]

h1. Position Description for ALAC Members and ALAC Liaisons

*1.0 Nominees for membership in the At-Large Advisory Committee,  as well as those seeking a position as an ALAC Liaison, should be  accomplished persons of integrity, objectivity, sound judgment and  intelligence who have:*1.1 A commitment to ICANN's mission and its core values as expressed in the ICANN Bylaws;1.2 An understanding of the potential impact of ICANN decisions on the  global Internet-using community, and the Internet end-user community in  particular.1.3 An understanding of the Domain Name System (DNS) and the basics of  IP addressing. This is not to say that candidates should be technical  DNS experts, but a minimal understanding of the DNS is needed to  effectively function on the ALAC. For example, candidates for the ALAC  should know the answer to a question such as "Do you know what happens  in the DNS when you send an email, or access a webpage?" This requires  an understanding of the general process of name resolution.1.4 Demonstrated capacity for thoughtful group decision-making and sound  judgment, and a track record of working to build consensus with a  diverse set of interests working together on complex policy issues.1.5 ALAC members and liaisons, along with the At-Large community of  which it is a part, are charged with representing the interests of the  entire 1.5 billion Internet end-users of the world in ICANN’s processes.  As a result, candidates for ALAC membership or a liaison post should  have a demonstrated capacity to represent the views of others  effectively, and generally refrain from advocating in support of  personal opinions. *{AP,AG: Move to top of list. ALAC members should act as conduits in both directions} {AG,PVW,CS,CA: Remove 1.5b and soften}{*}1.6 The ability to effectively chair meetings and provide leadership and support for work teams or committees.1.7 A willingness to serve as a volunteer, without compensation other than the reimbursement of certain expenses.1.8 In accordance with the recent ALAC review recommendations as adopted  by the ICANN Board, members of ALAC must have proficiency in written  and spoken English to allow the committee to function effectively and to  allow ALAC members to interact effectively within the overall ICANN  environment.
h2. Time Commitment and Working Practice

*2.0 Membership in the At-Large Advisory Committee is a  substantial commitment of one’s time as a volunteer. The basic  responsibilities of an ALAC member involve a minimum of 25 hours per  month on core Committee related activities. {AG,AP,PVW: It should be  made clear that this time commitment is over and above the requirement  to attend the three ICANN meetings per year. We also need to add that  teleconferences include participants from all of ICANN’s regions, and as  such will inevitably occur during working hours for some ALAC members,  and during evening or early morning hours for others. Although attempts  are made to lessen this impact, ALAC members should be reasonably  flexible regarding scheduling of conference calls given reasonable  advance notice. }{AP,CS,GS: too much to expect} {PVW: Specify actual  time of teleconference} {AG: NomCom says base =18 and Liason more.  GNSO=20 with up to 60 if take on additional tasks} {AG: not put call  time here, not stable enough}*

*2.1 Additionally, each ALAC member leads, co-leads, or  participates in one or more working groups on policy issues, which will  involve an additional average 10 hours per month in reading documents,  drafting proposed responses, and attending teleconferences and  participating in email and other electronic correspondence related to  those working groups.*

*2.2 The ALAC has minimum participation requirements that all  members are expected to meet, and members’ participation statistics are  published for the At-Large community and the rest of ICANN to review.  Expectations for participation include the following:*2.3 Attend and actively participate in monthly ALAC teleconferences, not  missing more than one-third of these meetings in any rolling six-month  period; *{AG,EL,PVW,CS,CA,GS: Delete 2nd phrase}{*}2.4 Participate actively in policy issues and other working groups. Each  ALAC member is expected to help lead at least one working group  composed of members of At-Large working on policy issues. A current  listing of working group and the remit of each may be found at [http://st.icann.org/working-groups|http://st.icann.org/working-groups]. *{AG,AP,PVW:  replace is expected to with will typically} {AG,AP: use more general  statement} {EL,CS,GS: keep as is, add required to report at ALAC  meetings} {AG: not everyone is a leader, add admin responsibilities}{*}2.5 Voting regularly in ALAC ballots on various subjects (at a minimum,  in ¾ of all ballots conducted). ALAC vote results are published and  publication includes a record of how each member voted, excepting where  the balloting relates to election of ALAC officers or liaisons. *{AG,EL,AP,PVW,CS,CA,GS:  Remove explicit target} {AP,AG:Vote in ALAC ballots to adopt policy  statements and other work of the ALAC, and the elections of officers and  other positions.} {PVW: Voting for ALAC not Liaisons}{*}2.6 Attend ICANN's three face-to-face meetings each year, which  generally run about 7 days with Committee members having extensive  responsibilities on most days. It is understood that events may  transpire to prevent attendance in person from time to time, in which  case participation remotely via two-way telephonic links is strongly  encouraged. There may occasionally be additional face-to-face interim  meetings or regional meetings.2.7 Reading and commenting in At-Large’s mailing lists and other communications media. *{AG,AP,PVW: ALAC and At-Large mailing lists}{*}2.8 For elected ALAC members, participation at monthly teleconferences  and intercessional activities of the At-Large community in the region  that elected him or her is expected. For Nominating Committee-appointed  ALAC members, participation in the monthly teleconferences and  intercessional activities of the region the ALAC member was appointed by  the NomCom for is expected. *{AG,PVW: for NomCom appointed, participation is optional but highly recommended} {EL,AP,CS,CA,GS: As is}{*}2.9 ALAC Liaisons are expected to attend and participate in ALAC  meetings, provide updates on their activities as liaisons, attend the  meetings of the body they are a liaison to (the “receiving body”),  participate effectively as an advocate for At-Large in the receiving  body, and where necessary propose responses from the ALAC to the  receiving body on policy or other questions. *{BB: Board liaison should not put forward personal opinions}*
*{PVW: ALAC and Liaison should represent ALAC, At-Large and their  positions in non-ICANN environments\]\[AG: perhaps encourage but not  require - not everyone is a salesman}*
----
h1. Comments

Comments from Alan Greenberg

-2.0 It should be made clear that this time commitment is over and  above the requirement to attend the three ICANN meetings per year.-

-We also need to add that teleconferences include participants from  all of ICANN’s regions, and as such will inevitably occur during working  hours for some ALAC members, and during evening or early morning hours  for others. Although attempts are made to lessen this impact, ALAC  members should be reasonably flexible regarding scheduling of conference  calls given reasonable advance notice.-

-2.3 My inclination is to remove the second phrase. It almost gives  people permission to miss 1/3, and that is not the message that we wish  to send. We can still flag people in the reports who exceed some  threshold.-

-2.4 I would replace “is expected to” with “will typically”. Also I  question whether we have enough ongoing WG to have everyone do this. I  guess I would prefer a more general statement about working on ALAC and  other ICANN WG and taking a lead position in at least one. But since  "being a WG member" often is nothing more than subscribing to a mailing  list, we need to have some words that imply real participation.-

-2.5 Again, I would remove the explicit target.-

-2.7 I would say "ALAC and At-Large mailing lists".-

-2.8 I would suggest that for NomCom appointed ALAC members, the RALO activities are optional but highly recommended.-

_contributed by_ _Alan Greenberg_ _on_ _Jul 27 9:01pm_
----
Comments from Evan Leibovitch

-I agree with Alan's comments about removing explicit  measurement-based performance targets; that is not the point of this  document.-

-I disagree strongly with Alan on 2.4 and 2.8 and request the original wording be maintained as-is.-
* -On 2.4: there is plenty of work for WGs to do... arguably an  ExecComm wouldn't need to exist if administrative working groups did  their jobs adequately. Likewise there is plenty of policy work that  doesn't get done because we don't have working groups to follow the  issues. We need ALAC to maintain the momentum created at the Summit and  the original wording of 2.4 does that. In fact, given the choice I would  strengthen, so that each ALAC member is assigned to report to ALAC  meetings on the activities of a designated liaison or working group.-

* -On 2.8: A NomComm ALAC appointee may not be accountable to their region but they should be- _{-}expected{-}_ -to be aware of their region's concerns and priorities. It is reasonable to demand their presence at RALO meetings.-

contributed by Evan Leibovitch on Jul 27 11:27pm
----
-Section 1. Suggest moving 1.5 to the first entry: ALAC's first  commitment is to the individual Internet user. Core duty of ALAC should  be to ensure that individual Internet users have a voice in ICANN. We  should be making effort or ensure the ALS/RALO model functions, that  individual users are informed of ICANN activities and have opportunity  to contribute to those activities.-

-Section 2, time commitment: general comment:-

-At a rough estimate, the total time commitment suggested is about  70 working days each year (at 8 hours/day: 25 hours/month, plus an  additional 10 hours/month highly likely, plus 3 meetings which including  travel will average at around 8-9 days ... not counting any recovery  time for jet lag, and not including any regional meetings, etc).-

-First, this is too much for any voluntary position.-

-Second, if this is what an ALAC member needs to do then the model of individual/ALS/RALO/ALAC/ICANN Community has failed. We are- *{-}not{-}* -the  representatives of 1.5 billion people... we attempt to ensure that the  views of individual Internet users as expressed through the ALS/RALO  structure are represented in ICANN.-

-About Alan's comments: agree with 2.0 (other than concern the  commitment is too much), 2.4, 2.7. 2.3 and 2.5, I think we need to  indicated some performance measure, but perhaps the actual % can be in a  separate document. 2.5, suggest change the first sentence to "Vote in  ALAC ballots to adopt policy statements and other work of the ALAC, and  the elections of officers and other positions."-

-2.8 Agree with Evan. I joined as a NomCom appointee with the expectation I would participate as the paragraph describes.-

_contributed by_ _Adam Peake_ _on_ _Jul 28 2:31am_
----
-Agree with Alan on most comments. WRT 2.8, it is indeed nice if the  nomcom-selected members participates in the RALO, but that should not  be compulsory.-

-Agree with Alan on the need to inform on the schedule of  teleconference, but would suggest to spell out explicitly that it is at  14UTC every last Tuesday of the month. This could be problematic for  some people if they find out too late.-

-Agree with Adam that we do not represent 1.5bn people. This is either arrogant or naive, depending on one's view.-

-Agree with Adam on expected time commitments and that we should move KPIs to another document.-

-2.5 Voting regularly in ALAC ballots is only for ALAC members, not for the board liaison. We might want to state it explicitly.-

-I would add a 2.10 bullet about advocating At-large positions in  other fora. The current description is entirely ALAC-centric. We need  people who talk about At-Large also outside the ICANN environment. This  is another way to recruit.-

_contributed by_ _Patrick Vande Walle_ _on_ _Jul 28 5:40am_
----
-I agree with Evan's perspective right down the line.-

-I take Adam's perspective that expectation of a 70 day/year  voluntary commitment could be problematic and needs revision. In fact,  if one calculated and quantified the time to read and understand  documents so you can make sensible interventions in his projections,  that number could easily double\! If you work at a FT job that is a  helluva lot of volunteering to do. Vacation days are almost always  invested as common public goods; I know because I have to use my  vacation days to attend ICANN meetings.- I have always believe that  the way to address the time commitment is to cherry-pick our issues and  battles. AG: Agree with last sentence but not part of PD

-Labeling is important to selling. So while I understand the  instinct to label ALAC as representing 1.5Bn Internet users, I agree  with Patrick that taking this seriously could be construed as arrogant  or naive, depending.-

-Carlton Samuels-

_contributed by_ _carlton.samuels_ _on_ _Jul 29 8:22am_
----
-Some additional thoughts.-

-1.5 I agree with Adam that this should be moved up. Although the  wording does not say that we represent 1.5 billion users (as suggested  in Patrick's comments), but rather that we represent their- -interest\--,  I agree that the statement is a bit much. I would certainly omit the  number: it is time sensitive, and the accuracy of it at any point in  time is actually highly questionable.\-

-Section 2- workload. I agree that when you add up the numbers, it is too large, but We do need to put\- _{-}something{-}_ -there.  What? I note that in the current NomCom documentation, it gives 18  hours per month with more for those who are Liaisons and this is clearly  excluding the 3 ICANN meetings. For another slant on it, the current  NomCom specs for the GNSO say:-The basic responsibilities of a GNSO Council member involve a minimum of  20 hours per month on Council related activities, with those chairing  or participating in committees or task forces spending up to 60 hours a  month or more. Depending on work load, for example during the weeks  before the 3 face to face meeting, this can sometimes escalate to as  much as 20 hours per week or more. The commitment for the 3 face to face  meetings generally run about 7 days with council members having  sometimes extensive responsibilities on most days. For those involved in  Task forces or Working Groups, there may occasionally be additional  face to face interim meetings.
-Regarding the timing of meetings, I agree with Patrick that putting  this somewhere would be useful. Not sure it belongs in the JD, and  perhaps it needs to be either floating or decided upon each year  depending on the specifics of the participants.-

-2.4 (lead WGs) I still feel that we would be better off here using  less specific terms and sending the message that we expect work.  Regarding Evan's comment about administrative WGs. This might be  correct, but the current 2.4 only talks about Policy WG- in my  mind, it should be expanded. But at a higher level, not everyone is a  leader and we are looking for productivity, not just the number of WGs  we have.\-

-2.5 I agree with Adam's wording on voting.-

-2.8 (NomCom appointees working with their RALO). I can accept  either version. Having served on the NomCom, Adam's comment is  interesting (that he expected to have to participate in RALO  activities). A quick question to the current NomCom chair about whether  she thinks it is reasonable might reinforce one position or the other.-

-2.10 (Patrick's suggestion that all ALAC members must be At-Large  advocates). I guess I don't really agree. Some people are good at this  and feel comfortable, others not. I don't think that we should list this  as a responsibility but perhaps a useful attribute.-

_contributed by_ _Alan Greenberg_ _on_ _Jul 29 11:56am_
----
I agree with Evan's comments right down the line. AG: NOT INCLUDED DUE TO NO IDENTIFICATION

_contributed by_ _Guest User_ _on_ _Aug 10 1:31pm_
----
-I strongly agree with Evan's comment specially in relation with job and obligations of Nom Comm appointees.-
 -measurements based targets must be removed, in my opinion is useless how have being expresssed.-
 -Also I think we represent the end users interests, not 1.5 Bn. people.-
And finally I disagree with the existence of Ex Com (I ratified my  position that I have already expressed repeatedly times). At this point  we need to find another way to administrate ALAC, and not with an "the  facto" body. AG: Not mentioned in PD.

-Carlos Aguirre-

_contributed by_ _Guest User_ _on_ _Aug 13 6:52am_
----
-I am basically in agreement with Evan's position, although I also  agree with Adam's and Carleton's comments about work load and the need  to "cherry pick"-

-Gareth-

_contributed by_ _Guest User_ _on_ _Aug 13 3:54pm_
----
Someone said "I agree with Evan's comments right down the line." on Aug 10 at 4:31 pm.

Can that someone please say who they are?

Alan

_contributed by_ _Alan Greenberg_ _on_ _Aug 17 11:02am_
----
I think it should be a requirement for board liaison candidacy that the  candidate be an active member of ALAC, whether non comm appointed or  not. AG: Part of Requirements, not PD.

-Also the language in here pertaining to the appropriate  representation of ALAC opinions is not strong enough. The board liaison  position is not an opportunity for somebody to get access to the board  in order to put forward his or her personal views about ICANN policy  matters.-

-Beau Brendler-

_contributed by_ _Guest User_ _on_ _Aug 24 6:49am_