Participants: I Aizu, T H Nguyen, F Seye Sylla, A Greenberg, B Brendler, C Langdon-Orr, S Bachollet, P Vande Walle, R Guerra, C Aguirre, J Ovidio Salgueiro, V Scartezini, H Diakite
Apologies: None
Absent: M El Bashir, A Muehlberg
Staff: N Ashton-Hart, M Langenegger
The Chair started the meeting at 0910.
The agenda was adopted.
The Chair noted that she would keep in mind that most of the ALAC members were volunteers, with many having core activities that were totally unrelated to the ALAC environment, and that consequently, it was vital that special care should be taken in order to ensure that the tasks entrusted to them be agreed to, measurable and achievable within the next 12 months. She then expressed the sense that the metrics used - attendance and voting participation - were not sufficient to ensure transparency and accountability but that the publication of these metrics had helped fostering the right mindset within ALAC committee. She then invited the members to express in turn their views on how they should be assessed and the expectations they had regarding their roles in ALAC and as representatives of their respective regions.
The staff informed that the draft changes to rule 21 was based on the suggestions sent on lists after the publication of a first spreadsheet on that matter and that it was burdensome in order to illustrate their impracticality.
The members then proceed to express their views regarding roles and assessment.
A Izumi said that qualitative measurement should at least go parallel to the quantitative ones in terms of attendances and that the counting of the absences needed to be mitigated by the personal circumstances of each.
TH Nguyen noted that it had taken her a year to understand all her obligations and that she still had to familiarize herself with the AP RALO and its 17 At-Large structures.
F Seye Sylla said that her first work had been trying to understand how the structure worked. With regards to Africa, she tried to understand how to improve the current situation. She had worked at the implementation of AFRALO teleconferences and that AFRALO the roles within the RALO needed to be more precise. She would actively try to increase the number of ALSes linked to AFRALO. Regarding the assessment, she agreed that the attendances/absences criteria should be balanced by the expertise and personal circumstances of the members otherwise it would lead to frustration.
A Greenberg thought that his RALO was rather active and felt that his part was to get up to speed with the ALAC relevant issues and give substantive responses to the emails when appropriate, no matter their technicality, by talking them up with more expert people, when needed. Recruiting new ALSes should not be his domain as his RALO was very active at that. He said that the proposed metrics served to flag certain problems but it would be better to look into the rationale for non performing and resented having to write useless time-consuming reports.
B Brendler said he had to balance his responsibilities towards the group that elected him with those towards his own organization and was mostly interested in the issues susceptible to interest the American consumers, focusing on fraud, enforcement and RAA issues. He wanted to have the freedom to participate in a way that best suited him.
V Scartezini said she found her motivation to become involved with ALAC in the bad rumors about ALAC she heard in the GAC and that she was now convinced of ALAC efficiency. ICANN needed to be reminded that the user’s vote was vital in their democratic process approach.
S Bachollet noted that he wished ALAC could agree on English as a common working language for the group and stressed that it should be a must for any newcomer to the group. He reminded that he had joined the ALAC late although he had followed its developments closely. He felt that he should help EURALO get up to speed and that the ALAC review was well scheduled as ALAC was now entering a new phase.
P Vande Walle said that he was not always aware of all the requirements. He thought that the performance criteria could be improved and that the RALOs should receive a detailed information about the candidate profiles and the time availability the role required. He stressed that the area of competence of the candidates should determine the nature of their input. ALAC should not forget that the candidate priorities lie with his remunerated work first. He felt that his obligation was to bring expertise to the ALAC and that he would bring a European accent while not strictly represent Europe. He also wish for more customized assessments.
R Guerra apologized for his bad participation due to health issues. He said that he had recently been promoted to a new position and that a staff meeting was now scheduled at the same time as the monthly ALAC calls. With regards to his liaison activities, he said, it could not attend all the meetings and complained about the lack of linkages with some of the other constituencies. He added that he would also use other than English languages because there was a need to increase the diversity and stressed the fact that he was also fluent at French and Spanish which was useful in his contacts with the AlSes.
C Aguirre argued that he would speak Spanish at this meeting because he felt it was his obligation to represent users that did not speak English. He said that often the ALAC discussed issues that were not interesting to individual users. He noted that he was still trying to understand ICANN’s mechanisms and structure and that it had taken him two years to feel familiar with them. He further noted that the participation in LACRALO had increased a lot in the two recent years. However, to further increase it, it was important to create more documents in the languages of his region. He often felt that the ALAC was only listened to when ICANN needed to legitimize its resolutions. Therefore, he felt strongly that ALAC should not forget its fundamentals such as multilingualism and more participation from countries, which are not yet represented in the region.
J Ovidio Salgueiro said that his mission was to represent individual users of his region and that often he had voted against his personal opinions because he felt obliged to represent his ALS. He agrees with C Aguirre that often issues that are interesting to individual users were not discussed. He felt that if some were not able to live up to the obligations at ALAC, they should recognize it and step down to give this opportunity to somebody else. He recalled that multiculturalism was not only a language issue but also a cultural one, which included different legal systems. The translation of the documents should be increased to eliminate the discriminations.
H Diakite said that the fact that most of the conferences were now interpreted into French made it easier for her region to participate. She felt that as an AFRALO elected member, she had to insist on multilingualism and promote the accreditation of ALSes in her region, given their very low number in comparison to the other regions.
She concluded asking for understanding when dealing with new ALAC members.
To conclude, the Chair noted that there were different ideas about what the role of regional representatives in the ALAC should be. She said that the resort to metrics should be kept but the tools for the metrics should be changed. About the liaisons, she noted that their performance assessment could also be done by the receiving body. She then ask for some ALAC members to form into a working group and draft a set of more adequate metrics for the ALAC member’s performance assessment.
C Aguirre, A Greenberg, C Langdon-Orr, P Vande Walle volunteered for this working group. C. Aguirre commented that this task would certainly take more than an extra session.
The meeting was then adjourned
