Alan Greenberg wrote:
I agree that having a Liaison in addition to voting member(s) would be optimal, but I do not see this being viewed as acceptable. The phrase "having your cake and eating it" comes to mind. And if it were a valid concept for us, it would apply to the SO as well. Given that there is pressure to shrink the size of the Board, I don't think that it is a likely scenario. As long as we can find a mechanism where the At-Large Board member(s) share values with the ALAC, I think it puts us on an equal footing with the rest of ICANN, and that is about as much as we can expect. I agree, and I am quite comfortable with the ALAC Review recommendation as-is.
The reps sent by ALAC to the Board could not be expected to be fully accountable once chosen, but ALAC can (and should) do its best due diligence to ensure that the people who are selected understand and share the sensibilities and goals of At-Large. The reps should IMO also be accepted as ex-officio members of ALAC -- perhaps able to vote on internal ALAC issues. - Evan