Any and all blogs from the community where the blogger is happy to have his blog referenced will be connected (of course the RALOS and ALAC could object to a blog being included if they wished to). The idea is that the dynamic display of all viewpoints would make the whole site more meaningful and thought-provoking. As to the ease of posting to icannalac.org easy - I didn't find it anything like as easy as posting to a Wiki, and the layers of approval also seemed to me counterintuitive and difficult. I believe some members of the community once commented in a similar vein. Since the community and members of the community do post to the wikis, and not to icannalac.org - which is referenced in each new ALS welcome letter as well as listed on all the wikis under links, and on the alac.icann.org site - I can only imagine that I wasn't the only one who found it difficult. see below for more. On 6 Jul 2007, at 17:55, Jean Armour Polly wrote:

Hi--who will choose the RSS /blogs to be carried on the site? For example, icannalac reflects a variety of views, with links to Danny Younger's and Karl Auerbach's blogs among others. If the ALAC committee selects the blogs to be carried can ICANN in ANY WAY refuse to carry the RSS content?

...

The design of the new site was deliberately based around the concept that the site for a constituency should reflect that constituency's views, and allow dynamic content development in a way that the current architecture does not. In fact, the process of posting content to the new site will in many ways be simpler than what is currently the case for icannalac.org.

Gosh-- posting to icannalac is ridiculously simple--easier than posting to a wiki. But back to the new site -- in the old days of alac.icann.org I recall your boss Denise told us that "not even a comma" could be changed on the official ALAC site without going through ICANN legal. So, I gather that this policy has changed?

There will be more on this subject in due course.

Nick, how do you see the workflow-- when if ever would ICANN legal get involved with the new site?

See above. I'm sorry I cannot say more at the present.

If they have NO involvement whatsoever with content, that would be reassuring to the ALAC community. Perhaps you could get a written statement from Jeffries (ICANN Counsel) to that effect and we'd be done here. Otherwise it is troubling to think that ICANN legal could always shut the site down and leave the community without a home and without access to its documents and discussions. Seems like the confusion could easily be cleared up with a statement from Jeffries.

There is not now, nor has there ever been, the possibility that the GC would shut down an entire community website for any reason. If there were a legal objection to a given statement or document it would be simply done because the GC believed that it would lead to lawsuits against ICANN. There is no censoring of ideas in this policy, though I think it is widely known that there is less than complete admiration for the fact that such complete review of every posting is currently necessary.

Thanks JP