I agree. The structure is baroque; such a diagram may have an unintended consequence. -----Original Message-----

From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Sent: Dec 14, 2011 2:16 PM To: Cheryl Langdon-Orr <langdonorr@gmail.com> Cc: ICANN AtLarge Staff <staff@atlarge.icann.org>, ALAC Working List <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org>, "na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org" <na-discuss@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@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.

- Evan _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac

At-Large Online: http://www.atlarge.icann.org ALAC Working Wiki: https://community.icann.org/display/atlarge/At-Large+Advisory+Committee+(ALA...)