[CCWG-Accountability] the term "community"

Mon Jan 12 22:12:42 UTC 2015

Dear All,
1. Does belonging to a community make you a member of ICANN ?
2, If yes, what is the accepted number for representation ?
3. If limited, what defines accredited delegates as members ?
4. If the word Community accommodates Stakeholders (Multi-Stakeholders),
can government be exempted ?
5. How does ICANN define representation ?

-Akinbo.

On Mon, Jan 12, 2015 at 8:34 PM, Eric Brunner-Williams <
ebw at abenaki.wabanaki.net> wrote:

>  Dear Tijani,
>
> The first use of a phrase, e.g., "stakeholder" in the context of
> persistent identifier to resource association over interconnecting datagram
> networks, by some author, e.g., the organizers and participants of a
> meeting, is incidental to the scope of the benefits of persistent
> identifier to resource association over interconnecting datagram networks.
>
> The beneficiaries during the hosttables period included government funded
> research universities, government agencies, and government contractors,
> and, using similar mechanisms, private and public institutions, including
> governments, and the first subscriber-based and otherwise unrestricted
> "public access" providers.
>
> Over time both SRI and its data consumers transitioned from hosttables to
> the DNS, and users of similar mechanisms transitioned to the DNS, and the
> benefit expanded to include support for persistent identifiers in scripts
> other then Latin, e.g., Arabic Script, Han Script, Hangul Script, Cyrillic
> Script, ...
>
> Were we to take the notion of "Stakeholder" from any time prior to the
> addition of support for these scripts to the IANA root zone, users of those
> scripts could be considered "customers" of the Verisign IDN testbed, but
> not "stakeholders" in the community which participates in the technical
> coordination of unique global endpoint identifiers -- the "ICANN
> community". Even today, as a speaker of minority languages, using extended
> Latin Script characters, and Scripts not yet present in the IANA root zone,
> I don't consider my language communities, as communities or institutions,
> at this point in time, to be "Stakeholders".
>
> Ironically, a MENOG mailing dropped into my inbox while reviewing the
> paragraph above -- ICANN has openings for IDN Program Managers -- in
> Istanbul and Singapore -- which are unlikely to be competent to address the
> needs of speakers of the Indigenous Languages of the Americas. Clearly we
> are not yet "Stakeholders".
>
> All this is simply to develop your point that the definition of
> "stakeholder" were to be static the consequences would be unfortunate, and
> on a very large scale.
>
> Finally, as a friendly nuisance (or nuance), the parents, siblings and
> extended family members of students have an interest in the schools their
> school age dependents attend, as do the taxpayers (public schools) and
> donors (private schools), textbook vendors, lower level schools (student
> producers) and higher level general and vocational schools (student
> consumers), as well as the community as a whole.
>
> This little bit simply to say it is more than students, teachers and staff
> that make a school.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Eric Brunner-Williams
> Eugene, Oregon
>
>
>
> On 1/12/15 9:59 AM, Tijani BEN JEMAA wrote:
>
>  Bruce, Kavouss and all,
>
>
>
> Stakeholders were defined for the first time in the World Summit on
> Information Society (WSIS) as:
>
> ·         Governments
>
> ·         International Organizations
>
> ·         Private Sector
>
> ·         Civil Society
>
> Where Academic and Technical community were included in the civil society.
> And then, the international organization was dropped and Civil society was
> split in 2 parts: Civil Society and Academic and technical community.
>
>
>
> I don’t think this definition is static and believe that stakeholders for
> the WSIS couldn’t be other thing that the 4 listed components because it
> was used to make the civil society activists participate in the room
> instead of demonstrating outside and having confrontation with the police.
>
>
>
> In a school, we can define 3 stakeholders: teachers, staff and students
> since the interest of each of those components is different. In ICANN, you
> have civil society in At-Large and the non commercial stakeholder group in
> the GNSO. You may also find them in other SO and AC. You may find private
> sector in the GNSO, ccNSO, SSAC, etc.
>
> Defining the ICANN stakeholders as Civil Society, Governments, Private
> sector and technical and academic community is not relevant in my point of
> view; they are more At-Large, Registries, Registrars, business
> constituency, non commercial stakeholder group, GAC, etc…. because those
> group have each its own interest and the multi-stakeholder model is
> intended to represent the interest of the whole community.
>
>
>
> Coming back to the global public interest, it was clearly explained in the
> articles to be the *benefit of the* *public and not the private gain of
> any person (financial, political, etc.).*
>
> The public is everyone, and the global public interest is the common
> interest of all this public.
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Tijani BEN JEMAA*
>
> Executive Director
>
> Mediterranean Federation of Internet Associations (*FMAI*)
>
> Phone:  + 216 41 649 605
>
> Mobile: + 216 98 330 114
>
> Fax:       + 216 70 853 376
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [
> mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org
> <accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org>] De la part de Bruce
> Tonkin
> Envoyé : samedi 10 janvier 2015 12:22
> À : accountability-cross-community at icann.org
> Objet : Re: [CCWG-Accountability] the term "community"
>
>
>
> Hello Kavouss,
>
>
>
> >>  I have one question which continued to bother me as everyone refers to
> "community"
>
>
>
> >>    What is that magic term "community» covers?
>
>
>
> >>    Does it includes or embrace the entire multistakeholders?
>
>
>
> >>    As it was discussed at several occasion, there is a defacto
> agreement that ,generally speaking multistakeholder composed of Civil
> Society, Private Sector, Technical Community including academics,
> Governments
>
>
>
>
>
> I think that is a good question, and probably worth this group considering
> some definitions around that topic.
>
>
>
> For me personally, I tend to think of the terms in the following way:
>
>
>
> "ICANN Community" - this is the group of people that participate in the
> various ICANN working groups via email, phone, or websites,  and attend
> ICANN meetings.     This group is made up of individuals from GNSO
> constituencies and stakeholder groups, GAC, SSAC, ALAC, RSSAC, ccTLD
> representatives, RIR representatives etc.    In my personal view, it is
> multi-stakeholder in that it includes people from Civil Society, Private
> Sector, Technical Community including academics, Governments.
>
>
>
> In addition to that there is a wider community of people that are members
> of the various organizations that are in turn members of the various groups
> that comprise the ICANN community.   As an example, I am a member of the
> Internet Society of Australia (ISOC) which is part of the Asia, Australasia
> and the Pacific Islands Regional At-Large Organisation (APRALO) which is
> part of At-large.   ISOC in Australia may send a representative to ICANN
> meetings.       A business might be a member of a chamber of commerce or
> business association, which in turn could be a member of the ICANN business
> constituency,  and that chamber of commerce or business association may
> send a representative to an ICANN meeting as a member of the ICANN
> community.   I don't have any specific name for this wider group of people
> and organizations.
>
>
>
> Then there is term "public" which is used within the term "global public
> interest".   In general, I personally think of the public in this context
> as Internet users.   However you could also consider public  in this
> context to be all the people of the world.   Even people that don't
> directly use the Internet as a communication mechanism are probably
> affected by it in some way.
>
>
>
> The fundamental responsibility of  the Board of ICANN  is to exercise
> their judgment to act in what they reasonably believe to be the best
> interests of the global public interest, taking account of the interests of
> the Internet community as a whole rather than any individual group or
> interest.    Its primary feedback mechanism for determining the global
> public interest is the "ICANN community" described above.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Bruce Tonkin
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
>
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
>
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
> ------------------------------
>     <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> Ce courrier électronique ne contient aucun virus ou logiciel malveillant
> parce que la protection Antivirus avast! <http://www.avast.com/> est
> active.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing listAccountability-Cross-Community at icann.orghttps://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Accountability-Cross-Community mailing list
> Accountability-Cross-Community at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/accountability-cross-community
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/accountability-cross-community/attachments/20150112/876a716e/attachment.html>