[NA-Discuss] Proposed NARALO Statement - V2

[Brendler, Beau]

I don't support this approach.

I think we should ask for a deadline extension and try to get a new draft document that speaks specifically to our concerns. Based on my experience with the ALAC review process, the ICANN is looking for suggestions on the way things ought to be. I think the reaction to this type of statement will be very negative and won't get us what we really want, or, to be frank, what I really want, which is maximum user representation in all the ICANN power centers in equal proportion to registrars and others who have nothing more than financial stakes in how ICANN operates. Personally, I think this document should specifically suggest what it is we want, rather than be a declaration of our disassociation from the process. This will just reassure everyone that the at-large can't agree on anything and get its act together (of all the regions, we are the only ones to object to this document and the process, which is not something I necessarily agree with, but is a political reality).

Some of the other statements I have seen so far in this chain, which in a way I regret I sort of started, have made some suggestions in this vein. May I suggest NA RALO take a different approach, put together some of that specific feedback on the way we think things ought to work, ask for a deadline extension, and submit that.

Also, though Alan Greenberg is nomcom appointed and not elected, he's a good guy who gives a heck of a lot of his time and is, in my opinion, taking an unfair hit.

Beau


-----Original Message-----
From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Thompson, Darlene
Sent: Thu 4/24/2008 9:40 AM
To: Gareth Shearman; Evan Leibovitch
Cc: NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Proposed NARALO Statement - V2
 
I, too, support this version.  Nice job Danny & Evan!

Darlene A. Thompson
Community Access Program Administrator
Nunavut Dept. of Education / N-CAP
P.O. Box 1000, Station 910
Iqaluit, NU  X0A 0H0
Phone:  (867) 975-5631
Fax:  (867) 975-5610
E-mail:  dthompson at gov.nu.ca
 

-----Original Message-----
From: na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org
[mailto:na-discuss-bounces at atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Gareth
Shearman
Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2008 12:57 PM
To: Evan Leibovitch
Cc: NA Discuss
Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Proposed NARALO Statement - V2

I support this version.

Gareth

On 23-Apr-08, at 8:06 AM, Evan Leibovitch wrote:

> Here are my contributions to the statement. I think this time, I may
> have been even angrier than Danny ;-)
> [ Note: I will likely not have access to email for the next 24-48  
> hours
> -- please work on this in my absense. ]
>
>
>
> Proposed NARALO Statement -- v.2
>
> The North American Regional At-Large Organization
> (NARALO) disassociates itself from the document
> submitted to the ICANN Board Governance Committee
> entitled "Joint users proposal GNSO structural
> change".
>
> Neither NARALO nor any of its At-Large Structure
> (ALS) members were consulted, in the development of
> a document supposedly designed to define At-Large
> involvement in the GNSO. We were neither
> participants in the formulation of this document nor
> afforded the opportunity to comment upon its interim
> drafts.
>
> The document, in its final form, does not address many
> issues previously identified by At-Large. We see
> major problems with a recommendation that fails to
> address the specific issues faced by the broad community of
> registrants, or to acknowledge the vital role of
> non-registrant user stakeholders.
>
> Furthermore, we are astounded that the ALAC was
> explicitly exempted from direct participation in the
> new GNSO formulation, despite the document's preamble
> which states that "ALAC is critical to ICANN's external
> perception". After many years of slow and painful
> development, the ALAC has finally taken first baby steps
> towards the fulfilment of its mandate to offer a focus
> and catalyst for At-Large communications and policy
> development. To explicitly exclude it from a role in
> At-Large advocacy within the GNSO at this time is
> beyond reason.
>
> The process used to create this document was highly
> objectionable. Significant changes in wording that
> negatively impacted the role of At-Large were made
> in last-minute revisions, which were not communicated
> at all -- by ALAC, GNSO or Staff -- to ALSs or RALOs.
> It was only through the personal diligence of our
> own members that we were made aware of these changes
> before the end of the comment period.
>
> Therefore it is the view of NARALO that it would be
> inappropriate for us to signal any support for the
> specific formulations contained in this document. It
> does NOT reflect the interests of NARALO or its
> member ALSs.
>
> We ask the Board Governace Committee to respect the
> principle of representation set out in ICANN's MOU
> that called for technical management structures to
> reflect the global and functional diversity of
> Internet users and their needs
>
>
>
>
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists
.icann.org
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------


------
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists
.icann.org

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
------

------
NA-Discuss mailing list
NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org

Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
------

***
Scanned