[EURO-Discuss] R: R: Proposal procedure active- non-active ALSes
wolf.ludwig at comunica-ch.net
Tue Aug 21 21:05:12 UTC 2012
Thanks for these inputs to our current debate, Christopher. I think they are useful for framing further discussions by avoiding formalist solutions. Any further feedbacks are highly welcome!
Christopher Wilkinson wrote Tue, 21 Aug 2012 20:19
>1. ALAC exercises its mandate as representing the larger community of
>ALS and other At Large.
> ALAC is already a rather small, high level group whose credibility
>depends entirely on their accountability and responsiveness to At
>Large, at large.
>2. Apparently there are busy ALS and less busy ALS in the ICANN
>context. (Bearing in mind that most ALS have other businesses to deal
>with at home.)
> But beware of imposing performance criteria on ALS and threatening
>dis-creditation. It would be better to use ICANN support to reactivate
>or re-prioritise the ALS in question.
>3. Regarding the decision-making process and the 'quorum', few
>decisions need to come to a vote. It would be better to relativise the
>quorum: strong quorum for a few important issues; weaker quorum for
>On 21 Aug 2012, at 19:33, Carlton Samuels wrote:
>EURO-Discuss mailing list
>EURO-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>Homepage for the region: http://www.euralo.org
mobile +41 79 204 83 87
EURALO - ICANN's Regional At-Large Organisation
Profile on LinkedIn
More information about the EURO-Discuss