[At-Large] Wrapping up the thread/discussion - Apoligies

[Izumi AIZU]

from the Far East,

I see both points from Ross and Evan, and somewhat trying
to agree with both -

To me, what Ross is saying is, in principle we set the agenda,
be active and responsible. I agree with this. What Evan is
saying is "first thing first". We better do the immediate
home work, which is not there yet. I also agree and admit
that. Both are right.

Now, what Robert and CFP folks tried to indentify about the
Internet Free speech, I don't see any immediate need to
address this issue at our Ciaro meeting - unless there is
clear and burning evidence that it affects the global ICANN
community under our mandate, which I cannot find it.

Different countries have different situation and values, and
it is not easy for outsiders to judge these without having
careful and meaningful dialogues with local partners and
stakeholders. So, unless our Middle East AtLarge folks
and their friends make clear and simple case, I think we
better not push it that much.

Thanks Robert, and all others,

izumi

P.S.
I didn't mind much about "cross-posting" this time.
I do not read ALL Governance list stuff, and in this case
it was helpful for me to read it.



2008/5/28 Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>:
> Ross Rader wrote:
>> All I'm saying is that I think it would serve our purposes to take a
>> broader, less cynical view of the role that the community has in
>> setting ICANN's agenda and mandate.
>
> I hear you. It's just that At-Large is still teething. We can barely
> wrap our collective heads around the narrow issues such as domain
> tasting, new gTLDs and IDNs. (*you* say "fast flux" quickly ten
> times...) Until not very long ago procedure dominated policy as
> At-Large's collective time-suck. Much of the top layer of At-Large is
> still distressingly elitist, but things are improving. Slowly.
>
> Things are starting to gel, but we're still some distance from what I
> would consider the maturity necessary to be consistently taken seriously
> as the "voice of the public" by the rest of ICANN.
>
> In other words, I'd like see ALAC achieve its existing mandate before
> even considering to take on more. And I don't even think I can see that
> far ahead...
>
> - Evan
>