[NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review

[Thompson, Darlene]

I like it.  Can we add anything about how this report went right against
the NomCom review that recommended removing NomCom from ALAC?

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: Friday, June 20, 2008 11:57 AM
To: NA Discuss
Subject: [NA-Discuss] Draft NARALO statement on ALAC review


NOTE: This is a draft, produced as a result of interest expressed in my
earlier query of this list. Even though it says "reached by consensus",
that of course will not be the case if we do not reach consensus.

Please -- SOON -- offer changes of any kind as well as any other
comments. If at least rough consensus is possible, I would like to have
a final version ready for presentation by Saturday night.

If it sounds to strong, or not strong enough, or you just don't like the
tone, etc. please suggest changes.

- Evan


---------------------------------------------------------


NARALO, by consensus agreement, urges ALAC to take every measure
possible to encourage rejection of the report of the 2008 ALAC review by
the ICANN board and other members of the ICANN community.

The ALAC Review process has been flawed from the initial choice of
review consultants, which we believe may have adversely affected the
independence of the review itself. Such suspicions appear to be
warranted by the complete lack of consideration of the needs of At-Large
in the reviewers' draft recommendations. While the report indicates we
were heard, we were clearly not listened to.

The logic behind the recommendation to deny At-Large voting membership
on the ICANN Board is puzzling; even in its best possible interpretation
the rationale emphasizes rigidity over good and responsible governance.

Not only do the ALAC review recommendations fail to progress the needs
of ICANN's At-Large community, they take a significant step backwards by
requesting that an even larger proportion of ALAC than currently exists
be composed of unaccountable, non-representative appointees of the
Nominating Committee. The result is a real and visible reduction of the
voice of the community for whom ALAC is supposed to speak.

Indeed, most of the report's recommendations appear designed to deny the
vision ICANN originally had for At-Large, to reduce the influence of
At-Large within ICANN, to reduce transparency, and to obstruct community
outreach. The review fails totally to address the fact that ICANN's
relationship with At-Large is bi-directional.

What is at issue is not only what the community must offer to ICANN, but
also what ICANN _owes_ to the community of Internet users who have
neither financial nor academic interest in Internet operation.

For these reasons, we call upon ALAC and other members of the ICANN
community to challenge the recommendations of the current ALAC review,
as well as the very frames of reference upon which they were
constructed. We believe that such actions are required for the
betterment of ICANN's public constituency.

This statement was reached by consensus of NARALO members on June 20,
2008 after efforts to solicit opinion from its organizational and
individual members.



------
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
------