[NA-Discuss] On the RAA issue - forwarded

[Evan Leibovitch]

*From:* Kieren McCarthy <kierenmccarthy at gmail.com>
*Date:* April 23, 2011 7:34:31 AM PDT
*To:* "na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org" <
na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
*Subject:* *Re: NA-Discuss Digest, Vol 54, Issue 26*

Hello all,

My two cents worth on the RAA statement.

It seems a little one-sided and demanding.

I don't think it does the ALAC any good to 'pick sides' in another SO's
dispute.

As such, It would have far greater impact if you acknowledged the statement
put out by the Contracted House, and then explained why, in the ALAC's view,
this was not sufficient to pull away from allowing other stakeholders to
view the process.

You could even try to act as peacemaker and suggest to the Board that both
sides find a mutually agreeable observer - who could be from anywhere in the
community (ALAC?).

The last thing I'd note is that the statement doesn't really explain why
individual Internet users are impacted by this. The average Internet Joe
doesn't care about the multistakeholder model - but he does care about the
rules surrounding domain names.

I think the statement would be much stronger if it was clearer why the ALAC
was sticking its oar in- because this has an impact far beyond the GNSO
Council.

Hope this is helpful,


Kieren

[from mobile device]