ALAC responses to comments received on the proposed criteria, process and guidelines
21 May 2003

Comments from Karl Auerbach

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00003.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00008.html>)

Inquired about public posting of comments and asked for public posting during the comment period.

• The comment period was extended to enable additional comments and responses to these postings.

Objected to use of the phrase ICANN's technical management responsibilities, and to the requirement that organizations demonstrate that their concerns/activities relate to this.

• The ALAC intended to simply reference the basic mission of ICANN. This phrase has been deleted. The ALAC believes that, to help achieve informed participation in ICANN of the At-Large community, At-Large Structures need to involve individual Internet users in at least one issue or activity that relates to ICANN's mission. This seems like a reasonable and necessary criteria to help reach our goal.

Thinks that the proposed criteria should not be imposed on the At-Large community until similar criteria are imposed on other ICANN stakeholders (and their constituent organizations).

• The ALAC proposed the criteria in a pragmatic approach to comply with ICANN s bylaws and launch the building of an effective network of At-Large Structures. We attempted to balance the need to minimize the rules and simplify the At-Large Structure designation process with the need to provide guidance and assurances that At-Large Structures would be credible groups that facilitate informed participation by users in ICANN. The ALAC has no authority over, nor position on, imposing criteria on other stakeholders or their constituent organizations.

Comments from Bret Fausett

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00000.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00009.html>)

Suggested deleting proposed At-Large Structure criteria #5 ("Be open and participatory) so closed communities of users could be At-Large Structures, as long as individuals have the ability to participate in another At-Large Structure.

• The ALAC has adopted this suggestion. The openness requirement cited has been removed to clarify that organizations with specific membership requirements (or closed memberships) may participate as At-Large Structures, so long as these groups are participatory in terms of involving individual constituents/members in policy development, discussions and decisions, and so long as the regions At-Large Structures *in aggregate* are open. To ensure that all interested individuals in each region have an opportunity to participate, the ALAC has added language to the RALO MOU guidelines that RALOs should demonstrate that every citizen or resident in its region is welcome to join at least one of its At-Large Structures.

Comments from YJ Park

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00001.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00010.html>)

Believes the proposal makes it impossible for individuals who are not associated with any specific qualified organization from participating in ICANN, and the proposal reminds her of building another version of the NCUC.

• On the contrary, the proposal mandates that interested individuals be allowed to participate and that RALOs be structured to ensure this. Further, the ALACs proposal must comply with the bylaws which state that RALOs "shall include provisions designed to allow, to the greatest extent possible, every individual Internet user who is a citizen of a country within the RALO's Geographic Region to participate in at least one of the RALO's At-Large Structures. A RALO may elect to also directly include individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the RALO's Geographic Region." RALOs can be structured to include individuals directly, or to include a "general At-Large Structure" through which any individual in the region could participate -- to name just two ways an individual could participate without becoming a member of an existing organization.
• The ALAC is not attempting or proposing "to build another version of the NCUC." The NCUC involves non-commercial organizations. The ALAC and the proposed At-Large infrastructure is aimed at involving *individual Internet users,* whatever the nature of their activities (whether commercial, social, political, purely personal or other) -- and uses organizations to enable individuals to be involved at the local/issue/regional level. The ALAC believes that, without the ability to globally organize and interact in a structured manner, At-Large and its members will not be able to achieve full or effective ICANN participation.

Suggests use of the concept of five geographic regions be reconsidered.

• The bylaws require a structure and representation for At-Large based on the existing ICANN definition of "geographically diverse" (involving five regions). This is consistent with how ICANN approaches geographic diversity for various entities. ICANN could decide in the future to take a different approach to geographic diversity, of course, but until it does, the ALAC must use with the existing definition.

Believes ICANN should prepare some detailed mechanism such as financial support to make At-Large members meaningfully participate in the ICANN.

• The bylaws state that Each RALO shall be comprised of self-supporting At-Large Structures The ALAC, however, will continue to explore ways of addressing financial barriers to At-Large participation in ICANN.

Believes the ALAC working language for this process should be diversified, and that the At-Large Structure application/designation process should be publicly archived, and that RALO MOUs should be posted for public comment before being signed.

• English is used by the ALAC to conduct its business and we believe expediency necessitates that the At-Large Structure applications be submitted in English. We do attempt to translate ALAC communications (ALAC members volunteer translations) to make our work more accessible to non-English speaking communities. The ALAC agrees that information on the At-Large Structure designation process should be publicly available, and that proposed MOUs should be published for comment. Language to this effect has been added. (However, it is worth noting that any language diversity requirements make achievement of the goal above financial sustainability more difficult.)

Asked What if RALO does have minimum of 500 individual members in at least 2 different countries within the RALO's geographica Region?

• The ALAC proposed a minimum requirement of 3 At-Large Structures based in at least 2 different countries within the RALO's Geographic Region participate before an MOU is signed (and the RALO becomes official). This is intended to help ensure broad representation and cooperation among organizations in a region, and to help prevent one organization or one country from dominating a RALO. However, this requirement may need to be revisited, and it would be addressed in the proposed periodic review of At-Large.

Comments from L. Gallegos

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00002.html

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00012.html>)

Believes that the process is too burdensome and is unnecessary to communicate a view to ICANN. Also feels that As long as the public is excluded from meaningful participation in the election of directors, full membership and all rights thereof, the ALAC is meaningless.

Comments from another individual to ALAC members (not authorized for posting on the ALAC forum) echoed this theme, objecting to what he described as the ALACs attempt to replace individuals rights to representation with benefits of participation, stating that the ALAC is not supporting workable mechanisms for informed participation, and proposing a Supporting Organization for the At-Large that elects half of the ICANN Board.

• The ALAC has attempted to comply with the bylaws and propose appropriate criteria, processes and guidelines to help launch a global At-Large infrastructure. We will continue working on this with an eye towards simplification (including creating a simple, easy to understand and complete At-Large Structure applications form). Individuals have a right to communicate freely. The ALAC is trying to help them communicate more effectively and influentially with ICANN. A certain amount of process and protocol is necessary to achieve this goal.
• The ALAC is committed to achieving informed participation in, and representation of, the At-Large community in ICANN. Working with existing groups (and anyone else who is interested) throughout the world to substantively involve individual Internet users seems like a practical, expedient way of jump-starting an engaged At-Large community. The ALAC (and this proposal) should be viewed as a critical first step towards structured involvement of the individual user community in ICANN and towards a formalized role in ICANN's policy development process that ensures individual users' views are taken into account. This is the ALAC's goal.
• The need for a structured process to bring to ICANN the individual user communitys opinions and input is further reinforced by the following observations by an ALAC member:
  1. The only way to extract a homogenous idea form the "big audience" is to work it through different levels of discussions. To have regional-level organizations that encourage these discussions is unquestionably useful.
  2. Posting comments in an e-mail list doesn't seem to be a better way to handle massive public participation. There are very few who can afford to invest all their time writing opinions in mailing lists (or even posting on websites expressing their disagreement).
  3. Indirect representation is a system commonly used in modern democracies all around the world. Dictators often present themselves as liberators and claim to express the public interest. The differences and similarities of populism and democracy apply here.
  4. A workable mechanism for participation and representation is unavoidable.
  5. To find support in existing organizations that represent Internet user interests seems to be the best way to foster the development of a public participation process in the ICANN community.
  6. You certainly don't need a card that states "director" to be heard and considered when bringing a good idea to the table. However, to have user representation on the Board, is, eventually, a highly desirable idea.
• The ALAC views this proposal as a workable mechanism for participation and representation. The ALAC has been structured to make sure that the voice of different sectors of the Internet community will be heard and that their representation can be effectively taken into account. The ALAC, and this proposal, give At-Large a role in the selection of Board members and provide At-Large with meaningful involvement in the development of policy within ICANN (in addition to providing mechanisms for commenting on proposed policies). For example, ALAC activities to date include:
  1. Outreach to At-Large communities in various regions, and proposing criteria, processes, and guidelines for creating an At-Large infrastructure;
  2. Appointing five delegates to the Nominating Committee (more than other stakeholder groups), and recruiting candidates with At-Large experience;
  3. Publicizing and analyzing proposed policies and their potential effect on the At-Large community, and providing mechanisms and processes for At-Large input and discussions a website, forum, and announce list have been created, and ALAC liaisons are active on the GNSO Council, WHOIS task force, and the new gTLD committee; and
  4. Providing advice on ICANN issues, proposals, and activities that are relevant to individual Internet users the ALAC has solicited input and provided guidance on the WHOIS database, new gTLDs, internationalized domain names, and WIPO recommendations (to name a few issues).

Comments from Marc Schneiders

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00004.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00007.html>)

Asked where/how international organizations (covering more than one region) fit in.

• Under the draft criteria, an international organization could be designated as an "At-Large Structure" within the region in which it has a majority of participants ("Participation by individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the Geographic Region in which the ALS is based will predominate in the ALS' operation.) This is consistent with ICANNs bylaws, which state that The criteria and standards for the certification of At-Large Structures shall be established in such a way that participation by individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the Geographic Region (as defined in Section 5 of Article VI) of the RALO will predominate in the operation of each At-Large Structure within the RALO, while not necessarily excluding additional participation, compatible with the interests of the individual Internet users within the region, by others. Another possibility is for an international organizations "sub-organizations" (e.g. local or regional chapters) to seek "At-Large Structure" designation in each region in which they are located. In addition, under the proposal, RALOs would have the flexibility to allow for some level of participation by international organizations (e.g. by creating a special category, in addition to "At-Large Structures," to accommodate international organizations' involvement in an advisory capacity).

Comments from Richard Henderson

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00005.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00011.html>)

Does not recognize the ALACs authority to organize on his behalf and believes an Internet users organization should be created outside ICANN to operate critically and independently.

• The purpose of the ALACs work is to propose a framework for individual user participation using existing and newly-formed organizations. It is our expectation that the At-Large infrastructure envisioned by this proposal will operate critically and independently. Although Internet user organizations can have constructive roles both inside and outside ICANN, we believe that by developing an At-Large infrastructure to involve and represent inside ICANN a broad set of individual user interests, we are helping to ensure that ICANN's policies reflect the interests of a full range of stakeholders. Bringing individual user interests to bear as DNS policies are being developed and decided upon requires the type of informed participation and representation that the ALAC is working towards. In short, consider the ALAC a channel *into* ICANN rather than just a part of ICANN. It will become such a channel only if those *outside* take advantage of this mechanism. They are free to ignore it, but then they risk not being heard.

Comments from Jeanette Hofmann

<http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00006.html>

(Response also located at <http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/criteria/msg00013.html>)

Objects to requiring individuals to found or join an organization in order to participate in At-Large, and expressed doubts regarding the 5 regions model.

• As noted above, the ALAC proposal complies with the bylaws and uses organizations to enable individuals to be involved at the local/issue/regional level. The proposal also allows for RALOs to include individuals directly and to propose other ways individuals could participate. Regarding basing the At-Large infrastructure on 5 regions, this is required by the bylaws and is ICANNs basic approach to diversity. We will note this issue as something to examine during review of the At-Large Structures and Regional At-Large Organizations.