Wendy, Thank you for your comment on this topic. I am sure that if asked you will indicate that: 1. The ALAC never took a formal vote on the Statement 2. No members of the ALAC from regions other than NA expressed any views whatsoever on the topic on the at-large discussion list (which is not surprising as they rarely express any opinions on anything). 3. The work of the ad-hoc GNSO Improvements Working Group was totally non-transparent (not even an archived discussion list). 4. The broad At-Large community was not afforded an opportunity to discuss the Joint document prior to its release. 5. There are those in the at-large that do not support the concept of eliminating Non-Com representation in the GNSO. 6. Some in the at-large view the statement that "At-Large would not accept anything less than 50% of the voting power of the Non-Commercial Interest Group", as ludicrous. 7. Some regard the ALAC push for a multilingual approach within the GNSO to be a foolish waste of money and point to the horrid expenditures on the part of the ALAC for contracted (yet unused) translation services. 8. The comment "Since as mentioned the At-Large community has been actively engaged in developing and implementing new approaches to a working group modality for policy development, some of the experiences we have had in that process may prove salutary", is an insult to the intelligence of the community.