[NA-Discuss] The status of ALSes

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

On 6/8/13 1:04 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:
> Personally I believe the problem isn't with the ALS's we've got but
> with the ones we haven't got. We need more.

I concur that more, and more, for want of a better word, broadly
subscribed organizations, would, if they could be induced to invest
the time and attention in "At-Large" as a means to advance the public
interest, be likely to improve a Regional At-Large Organization,
possibly even this one.

I do not concur that no currently certified ALS of this RALO is
relieved of its enumerated responsibilities, nor do I concur that
abandonment of responsibilities is without harm, nor do I concur that
current harm can be excused by anticipation of subsequent benefit. I
therefor personally believe, unlike yourself, that there is "a problem
with the ones we've got", where "ones" is understood to mean one or
more, but not all.

Did you have the opportunity to express your personal belief when this
issue was previously raised and entered in the record, viz July and
June of 2011, and July and March of 2010?

I understand the notion that "more will solve", I simply don't observe
"more" sufficient to "solve". Thanks for the earlier link to the
Python skit, it was of course, quite droll.

Eric Brunner-Williams
Eugene, Oregon