[At-Large] [NA-Discuss] ALAC vote on RAA now open -- and it sucks

[Alan Greenberg]

No, I am fulfilling a commitment I made several weeks ago at the last 
GNSO meeting. I made it very clear that I was submitting the motion 
(I cannot actually move it since I have no status to do that) based 
on my saying I would work with Chuck, and along the way we realized 
that we had somewhat different views and decided to submit both for 
Council's consideration.

I made it painfully clear that this was NOT an ALAC recommendation, 
and that I would pass on the ALAC position once I had it.

I have no "personal agenda" here. I have never claimed to be an RAA 
expert. That does not mean I don't have moderately well-informed 
opinions. But I have just been passing on what was discussed in the 
GNSO and attempting to pass back what I understand to be the ALAC 
position. That is the role that I have been asked to fulfill. Once it 
became clear that what I thought was an ALAC consensus position might 
be in error, I have made several attempts to get the ALAC to clarify 
its position.

I had volunteered to work on a motion for the GNSO based on the 
briefing we received from staff, and I did my best to meet that 
commitment. Period. If you or anyone want to read that as advancing a 
personal position, I can't stop you, but that has not been my intent. 
I have rather high standards of ethical behaviour and of meeting 
commitments that I make, and I do my best to follow them.

Alan

At 11/12/2008 03:39 PM, Danny Younger wrote:
>Alan,
>
>in advance of the ALAC vote you have already submitted a motion on 
>the RAA amendments to the GNSO Council for consideration --
>http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg05881.html
>
>-- it seems to me like you are advancing your own personal agenda at 
>our expense.
>
>Danny
>
>
>