[NA-Discuss] On ALAC response to BGC WG midpoint etc.: How do you want me to vote?

[Danny Younger]

Evan,

I would like to discuss this paragraph:

"Please note mechanisms of this process would need careful consideration and further discussed, but could take the form of either one of the two Board Seats being initially made by the ALAC per se or perhaps more preferably an ALAC to Board Liaison role being maintained where the
Liaison is a Member of the ALAC."

1.  The ALAC is indicating that they "prefer" a liaison arrangement moreso than having 2 seats on the board
2.  They want the board liaison to be a member of the ALAC (which under current circumstances would mean that Wendy couldn't serve as the liaison as she is not an ALAC member)
3.  They want one of the board seats selected by the ALAC rather than by the general ALS membership.

The odds are that most ALAC members haven't read this document, are just going along with whatever Cheryl drafted, and haven't given these matters any thought.  I find this paragraph to be problematic to the point that I could not endorse the Statement.


--- On Mon, 12/22/08, Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org> wrote:

> From: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] On ALAC response to BGC WG midpoint etc.: How do you want me to vote?
> To: "Brendler, Beau" <Brenbe at consumer.org>
> Cc: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
> Date: Monday, December 22, 2008, 9:25 AM
> Good morning and happy holidays, everyone.
> 
> It was less than a week ago that Beau sent his original
> message on this
> subject to the list. Thanks to his consultation, and some
> swift response
> from NARALO, the ALAC chair has withdrawn the original
> vote, changed the
> wording to remove all references to the Executive. While
> acknowledging
> the role of Internet users in other bodies such as the
> GNSO, the
> response still agrees that ALAC is "the appropriate
> organisational
> channel for the voice and concerns of the individual
> Internet user in
> ICANN process". Personally I'm quite fine with
> this wording but I know
> that Beau, Wendy and maybe others had concerns with it.
> 
> My personal opinion is to approve the doc as it is now.
> 
> - Evan
> 
> ------
> 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
> ------