Roberto and all, Consensus cannot be accurately determined without a vote of all interested participation members. Secondly, why is this only now being given consideration? Isn't such a consideration only about 6 years past due? Why also is the GA not being given such consideration? Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827 Roberto Gaetano wrote:
Beau,
So, I assume that you would be happy to have a constituency in the GNSO, like the Business Constituency, and only two people in the NomCom. Of course, no Liaison to the Board, at that point. That would match exactly the power of the BC.
Is that the consensus?
Thanks, Roberto
_____
From: Brendler, Beau [mailto:Brenbe@consumer.org] Sent: Friday, 15 February 2008 09:48 To: Roberto Gaetano; Jacqueline Morris; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
In my opinion, if we don't get what we are asking for, there is not much point in having an ALAC. In answer to your question, I would rate the "power" of the individual users compared to the "power" of the business constituency, registrars, etc., as about a 1 compared to a 10.
Beau Brendler
_____
From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org on behalf of Roberto Gaetano Sent: Thu 2/14/2008 12:48 PM To: 'Jacqueline Morris'; alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
I have a question. How would you rate the "power" of the individual users (via the ALAC) in the ICANN process compared, for instance, to the "power" of business users (via the Business Constituency)? Considering that the ICANN model is a multistakeholder model, where different stakeholder groups participate on equal footing, comparable stakeholder groups are supposed to have similar rights.
I believe that, also considering the different reviews (GNSO, NomCom and ALAC) ongoing, you might better be careful in what you ask for, because you might get it.
Cheers, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Jacqueline Morris Sent: Thursday, 14 February 2008 21:35 To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org; ttcs@yahoogroups.com Subject: [At-Large] Fwd: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2
Fyi Please comment. Jacqueline
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg@web.de> Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 20:20:14 +0430 Subject: [ALAC-Internal] alac jpa draft 2 To: ALAC internal list <alac-internal@atlarge-lists.icann.org>
Dear folks,
Here, the draft by the present drafting group members: Annette, Beau, Wolf
we stayed in the taj palace and come over to dinner now! ;-)
see you soon
best greetings
annette
Proposed ALAC-statement regarding JPA:
As the JPA (between the US Government and ICANN) is under Review, ALAC wishes to underline the unique opportunity the occasion offers to realize the original goals that led to the formation of ICANN. These include, inter alia, acknowledgement of the international nature of ICANN, support of the multi-stakeholder bottom-up approach to the management of ICANN, and the provision of viable and stable channels for the involvement of individual Internet users in the ICANN policy formation process. Measures must be implemented to ensure non-discriminatory availability of ICANN/IANA services as well as the opportunity for the involvement of global individual users in the ICANN process.
In its role as the voice of the individual Internet users, ALAC firmly believes that the current multi-stakeholder framework at ICANN should be further strengthened to allow more effective involvement of end-users. The process to full participation of individual users through the ALAC and its Regional At-Large Organizations (RALOs) is being undertaken at this moment. There is, however, a lack of incentives for the participants, especially a lack of direct involvement at the decision-making levels of ICANN. Therefore,
we believe ICANN should consider mechanisms for stronger user participation, such as At-Large voting rights on the GNSO council and the ICANN board.
Alternative for the last sentence:
[we think that ICANN should find ways to implement adequate representation of individual users at the decision-making levels of ICANN so that a real multi-stakeholder framework is achieved.]
In addition, we believe no government should have a pre-eminent role in DNS management and exercise power over database changes and root-server data. We suggest that an institutional form should be found as soon as possible so that ICANN does not lie under the authority of any single national legislation. We also strongly advocate transparency and openness in the process of making any structural change in the ICANN framework for the coming transition.
We are concerned that the successor oversight framework is still not clear and ICANN needs to clarify the transitional arrangements with regard to accountability and transparency as well as to allow further definition and evolution of the multi-stakeholder model of governance under which it operates.
We need to know what replaces the JPA, which refers to "the global participation of all stakeholders" and "mechanisms for involvement of those affected by the ICANN policies." As the Internet-using public is a key set of stakeholders affected by ICANN's policies, it is critical, including for Internet security and stability, that the organization be accountable to the public and account effectively for its input.
Respectfully submitted,
Chair
At-Large Advisory Committee
Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
------------------------------------------------------------------------ Name: winmail.dat winmail.dat Type: application/ms-tnef Encoding: base64
------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org