I promised some pointers to the recommendations that might be of particular interest to the ALAC and At-Large. This is not to imply that the others may not be of interest, but the ones I am highlighting may directly affect us or touch on issues that have been the subject of earlier ALAC/At-large discussions. 3 - Evaluate Board compensation: Although not immediately relevant, the At-Large Director is also eligible for compensation and the extent to which this improves (or hurts the pool of candidates seeking the position may be of interest in the longer term (I say the longer term because any results from this recommendation will not be immediately available). 4 - SO/AC consultation on issues to be addressed by the Board. This recommendation aims to eliminate the perception and perhaps reality of the Board acting in isolation without appropriate input. 6 - GAC transparency: Although not directly related to the ALAC, it is clear that GAC advice and other input to the Board has the potential for substantive impact, and anything which makes their input more understandable and transparent is a good thing. Currently, the source and motivation of some of their input is cloaked in secrecy. The recommendation also makes reference to the possibility of Liaisons from other ACs and SOs to the GAC, something that the ALAC has long discussed. 7 - Improve the public comment process. 8 - Improve translation services. 9 - Review Ombudsman role. The ALAC, or more particularly the ALAC Chair, has at times called upon the Ombudsman, but some of the services that have been provided (to our benefit), have not actually been sanctioned by the Bylaws governing the Ombudsman. 10 - Improve the PDP and in particular, make participation easier and more productive, and ensure that those not funded by their companies (such as At-Large participants) are not disadvantaged. It also addresses language issues. Lastly, there is note that the "disadvantaged" should be better supported in all areas of ICANN and not just GNSO PDPs. Travel issues are directly connected to this one. The decision on whether to proceed with this wider recommendation may hinge on what level of support (or rejection) it receives during the comment process. If the ALAC feels that any of these (or other) recommendations are important, a statement of support should be made. You can be sure that if anyone else feels that they would be BAD for ICANN, a comment will be made. By the same token, if the ALAC feels that any of the recommendations are ill-advised, this is the time to go on record saying so. Alan