[NA-Discuss] [ALAC] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy & Commerce Committee
beaubrendler at earthlink.net
Wed Dec 14 19:20:17 UTC 2011
I agree. The structure is baroque; such a diagram may have an unintended consequence.
>From: Evan Leibovitch <evan at telly.org>
>Sent: Dec 14, 2011 2:16 PM
>To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com>
>Cc: ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff at atlarge.icann.org>, ALAC Working List <alac at atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>Subject: Re: [ALAC] Fwd: Re: Draft letter to House Energy & Commerce Committee
>On 14 December 2011 12:09, Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Thanks OCL I wonder though as you have gone to the second page with
>> the layout is it worthwhile inserting the ALAC and At-Large Structure
>> diagram as a easy to read and understand graphic on the last (2nd ) page
>> below the signature line as a form of 'appendix' You know pictures are
>> worth a <insert ###> of words rule...
>I'm not sure that such an introductory letter needs much explanation, let
>alone diagrams. We're simply indicating "A forum to represent the public
>interest within ICANN currently exists, if you're genuinely interested in
>hearing that PoV".
>The mere awareness -- especially if we get on a mailing list to participate
>in future solicitations of comment -- is a major step. If a Congressperson
>wants to peek inside the sausage factory we can give offer as much (or as
>little) detail as necessary.
>Besides, this is the US Congress within an amosphere of political
>exceptionalism. Any interest in the geographical diversity of At-Large
>(IMO) would be accidental.
>ALAC mailing list
>ALAC at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org
>ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALAC)
More information about the NA-Discuss