Thanks for this Brett... Just one point in reply... The ALAC is very careful *not* to see regional representation (be it via the NomCom or a form of RALO election or appointment) as different in any way as to the value they bring to our work and discussions... As Chair of ALAC I can only trust and believe that the RALOS's are also making the very best of all the appointees their region have into the ALAC... And unfortunately due to no fault or deliberate intent I am keen to assure you, NARALO quite frequently Alan has been the only one from you region willing and/or able to (or in some cases attending) the meetings where discussions are going on... PLEASE note this is not any implied criticism of anyone or region as *no* Region has a perfect attendance or involvement record for the current ALAC's meetings and activities... But the use of the Wiki and follow up WG and committee activities etc., is always a standard method where regions can ensure they are being properly represented or at least I hope are able to brief whom ever has volunteered... I do regret that what you have quite reasonably described as the "disconnect" on this topic for NARALO has occurred, and I hope the damage is not either serious or an any way irreparable... And from this 'experience' might I suggest that perhaps it is indeed a good time that each of our RALO's have a look at how they allocate responsibilities and support the work of their 'trusted people' as well as give them the required authority to work in the ALAC volunteer model and to continue to evolve and work to the best of our capacity and perhaps to soon meet some of what I see as its potential... CLO -----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Bret Fausett Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 2:25 PM To: At-Large Worldwide Subject: Re: [At-Large] GNSO Improvements - ALAC and Joint Statements - comments requested On Apr 23, 2008, at 7:14 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote:
the RALO representatives in the ALAC GNSO Improvements WG
Cheryl, thank you for the detailed explanation. It helps. On the substance, I am big believer in tasking trusted people with responsibility and giving them the authority to make decisions as needed. In reaching compromises with many disparate groups, this is the only way. More consultation back with the ALS representatives would have been helpful though. We should never be surprised by outcomes. As a matter of procedure, you used the quoted words above, but the people on the WG were *ALAC* representatives, not necessarily RALO representatives. While I have the greatest respect for Alan and Vanda, they are both NomComm appointees to the ALAC. Alan is from North America, but he is not the designated representative of any North American ALS. Personally, I take great comfort in the fact that Alan was on the committee. Given his liaison work, he's the *one* person I would have wanted on the committee. But the fact that the NARALO was not on the committee perhaps explains some of the disconnect we are now experiencing. As ever, it comes down to communication. -- Bret