So far as I can tell, every single bit of feedback received has regarded the elimination of the AGP, with only the severity of the need to eliminate it varying between the comments. I look forward to the revisions to the ALAC submission, which reflect the At-Large community's overwhelmingly clear assertion that the AGP is determined to be harmful to the public good. It is a mockery of this stance to simply list elimination of the AGP as one of a number of recommended options. It must be made clear that partial measures such as surcharges are only stopgaps along the path to halting the practice altogether. I would remind the ALAC that it is a collector, not a framer, of public opinion. You asked for input and you got it. If the overwhelming public sentiment is ignored or downplayed in the official At-Large position, don't complain when future calls for public input get similarly ignored. Not every issue will have public opinion so clearly aligned; if ALAC can't get THIS one right, future issues will be even harder to tackle. As we all know ALAC is under extremely close scrutiny, by ICANN but also by public groups and participants, many of whom believe that this whole At-Large creation is a placating gesture and a waste of time. It is a corruption of ALAC's purpose to factor objections from other constituencies into its own positions; our paramount goal is to determine the public good and to assert that public good -- undiluted -- into the ICANN ecosystem. It won't happen overnight... but if it is done meekly and apologetically it won't happen at all. Given the immense cynicism that hangs over ALAC from all circles, perhaps some opportunities present themselves in which the taking of a principled stand, and forcefully getting behind it, is more important than milquetoast diplomacy. I suggest that this is one of those opportunities. Maybe it's about time that ALAC stopped claiming to protect the public good and started actually doing it. Here's a chance on a platter to do so. - Evan