[NA-Discuss] ALAC Review -- NARALO position?

[Thompson, Darlene]

Well, I *definitely* think that we need to create a position paper
delineating the various points about this report.  I think that we
should take it right from the bottom up of why other qualified reviewers
weren't even considered and why our views weren't even referenced in the
report.

D

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 Evan
Leibovitch
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 3:13 PM
To: NA Discuss
Subject: [NA-Discuss] ALAC Review -- NARALO position?

Hello fellow NARALOites,

I have heard from a number of our RALO members on the issue of the draft

report, but far from everyone and not even a majority.

I believe this issue is important, because if accepted as-is the 
proposed changes will diminish the role of At-Large in ICANN goings-on 
at a time when this role requires enhancement. All the well-intentioned 
policy work we can do will be impeded or "consensus-ed" into the ground,

with no real clout at the Board level.

Those who have spoken on the issue that I have heard from have all been 
critical, but this is far from a widespread protest.

I would like to know whether there is interest in having a NARALO 
position on the draft report before the Paris meeting. Having this would

help guide your representatives there (myself, Darlene, Beau and Robert)

on the inevitable discussions on the issue that will take place. Perhaps

we may even be able to prod the global ALAC into action of its own.

I have no problem writing a initial position to post for endorsement -- 
but it would reflect my own deep negative reaction which has already 
been described on this list. My time is very limited, however, and I 
would prefer not to start this if no interest exists in creating a 
regional position. If interest does exist, I can draft a brief statement

(preferably working with others who would like to help) and see if, with

any suggested modifications, it can be accepted by NARALO through 
consensus by Sunday morning.

Is this reasonable? Is a statement desirable? I find it very unnerving 
that there has been ZERO reaction on the global ALAC list except for 
Izumi's brief comment. If ALAC is not interested in staking out a 
membership-based position then I think NARALO needs to step up.

What does everyone else think? Feel free to reply privately, if that is 
appropriate for you, and I can incorporate your comments anonymously. 
Even if there is no consensus on a region-wide point of view, all input 
is helpful.

- 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
------