[NA-Discuss] registrant advisory committee

[Michael Maranda]

For the record, I also support John's general view here.     At Large must
be definitively inclusive of all Internet users (and perhaps further - all
potential users?) and not in any way restricted to domain registrants.
What current language leaves this ambiguous?  What specific changes if any
would be required to address the point John raises?   Is there support
within NARALO to bring this case to ALAC, and short of ALAC interest, to
ICANN directly?

Also, for the record, I am greatly offended by Mr. Kieran McCarthy's tone on
the At Large listserv.  His recent statement there is antithetical to the
spirit of the At Large community.   For a staff of ICANN, especially one
charged with public relations to offer such a callous statement demands a
formal response.  I have addressed my concerns directly to the NARALO chair.

MM

On 17 Feb 2008 17:13:02 -0500, John L <johnl at iecc.com> wrote:

> > I'd like to see NARALO back this proposal.   I'd also like to see other
> > RALOs take a position.  Perhaps if NARALO signs on support from At-Large
> > could be solicited.
>
> I'm only in favor of it if at the same time they change the bylaws to make
> it clear that the ALAC represents all Internet users, in particular the
> 99.9% who have never registered a domain and never will.
>
> Among ALAC's problems is that we've never been able to make up our mind
> whether we represent non-institutional registrants or all users.  To me
> it's obvious that the right answer is the latter, but many ALAC members
> have felt otherwise.
>
> R's,
> John
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org/attachments/20080217/39dccf25/attachment.html