Hope everyone had good journeys back. I assume you all have seen this story in the New York Times? http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/19/technology/private-fight-at-internet-namin... ALAC is frequently concerned with how it is perceived by others, especially when it comes to representing the user community. For the New York Times to have written a story like this, it must have deemed the story to be relevant to the general public. Yet ALAC, despite having ample opportunity and guidance during the week, failed to make a statement, even when it was already written for them, twice, by me. It distracted itself by claiming the story was no big news, or out of scope, or too confrontational for its multicultural nature, etc. etc. And it was distracted by the failure of LACRALO to conduct a meaningful general assembly. Rather than focus on policy issues, such as this one, it focused on elections of its own officers. Fortunately, I do believe Jean-Jacques Subrenat raised the conflict of interest issue in the public forum, but, as he eloquently pointed out to the list, he was something of a lone voice in doing so. Since the ALAC does not consider such issues as those that appear in the New York Times story to be of importanance, then I am forced to conclude that ALAC is not capable in its current construction to carry out its mission to speak for the Internet user. I have been asked by one of the publications I write for to put together a story about what's going on here, and I believe I have no other choice, in fact, am obligated as a journalist to cite ALAC's failure to raise this issue sooner (or at all). Beau Brendler