because ICANN's bylaws require all supporting organizations, councils etc to be reviewed on a regular basis, and the ALAC structures haven't yet been reviewed, and are behind schedule for review <http://www.icann.org/general/bylaws.htm#IV-4>. This might be a positive step. With RALOs in place, an outcome might be to allow for more direct representation rather than the current rather weak and indirect liaison structure. Perhaps... Thanks, Adam At 9:28 PM +1200 4/5/07, Franck Martin wrote:
Why does ICANN set up a new structure with RALOs and then decide to review it, before they even did any work?
I'm certainly confused here.
On 4/5/07, Denise Michel <<mailto:denise.michel@icann.org>denise.michel@icann.org> wrote:
Dear members of the At-Large community:
Please be advised that, on 30 March 2006, ICANN posted for public comments proposed Terms of Reference detailing questions that would guide the independent review of ICANN's At-Large Advisory Committee and global At-Large structures and processes <<http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-30mar07.htm>http://icann.org/announcements/announcement-2-30mar07.htm>. The public comment period will conclude on 29 April 2007. Please send comments to: <<mailto:alac-review-tor@icann.org>alac-review-tor@icann.org>. View comments at: <<http://forum.icann.org/lists/alac-review-tor/>http://forum.icann.org/lists/alac-review-tor/>.
-- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Franck Martin <mailto:franck.martin@gmail.com>franck.martin@gmail.com "Toute connaissance est une réponse à une question" G. Bachelard
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org www.icannalac.org