[NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework andConflicts of Interest Policy

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

Evan, Danny, and all,

  I must broadly agree with your response to Danny below.
Yet still I fear and feel strongly that much of what
Danny has stated is accurate or largly rings true.  I
do not believe that Danny is attempting to be disruptive,
but is reflecting his frustration in observation to what
he reads here and has otherwise experianced.


-----Original Message-----
>From: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
>Sent: Apr 14, 2008 5:16 PM
>To: NA Discuss <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework andConflicts of Interest Policy
>
>Danny Younger wrote:
>> We are in the middle of the ALAC Review process.  The
>> very first determination that the evaluator will need
>> to make is whether the ALAC has a continuing purpose. 
>> I am using this list to put forward the argument that
>> the ALAC no longer has a continuing purpose.
>>
>> You may not like this perspective, but I have a right
>> to express this viewpoint.
>>   
>I am not for a moment denying your right to express your opinion, and
>regardless of my views on your conclusions I can appreciate how you got
>there. You may be surprised at the extent to which I (and I suspect
>others) may agree with you.
>
>Just the same, you've missed my point completely. I'm not challenging
>your right to speak but I absolutely question the judgment and tact (or
>lack thereof) used in choosing this forum.
>
>By definition, those on the ALAC list (and its RALO subsidiaries such as
>this) are generally involved because we _do_ feel that we're making a
>difference. Repeatedly telling _this_ audience that At-Large is useless
>and should be eliminated is both insulting and pointless.
>
>Certainly within ICANN there are places to express  and debate your
>views in such a way they may have influence, most notably -- as you well
>know -- the ALAC review. I'll be more than happy to challenge or support
>those views in the appropriate venues, but doing it _here_ is simply
>destructive and distracting. It's simply disingenuous of you to complain
>of our lack of effectiveness, while deliberately getting in our way and
>attempting to distract and demoralize as we try to be effective. Indeed,
>doing so will prove to be quite counter-productive _especially_  in
>other regions that are less tolerant of verbal aggression.
>
>Until Plan B materializes, the status quo is what we have to work with.
>Within this group, I am asking you to help us make the most of what we
>do have (while working in other channels to improve the situation).
>Otherwise, get out of the way and at least don't impede our efforts to
>do what we can -- as I'm sure you're aware, ALAC is already far too
>easily distracted. I'm really hoping you choose the former.
>
>And I'll be happy to help find a more appropriate place for a public
>"the future of ICANN public participation" debate. Just not here, please.
>
>- Evan
>
>
Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827