Danny Younger ha scritto:
I don't want a powerless ALAC model that offers no hope of representation on the ICANN Board. I want our community to have the benefit of a Supporting Organization model that seats its members on the ICANN Board... I can't imagine that you would prefer to remain powerless and unrepresented?
Ok, let's assume that a SO or any other instrument to increase the relevance and powers of the At Large inside ICANN can be a shared objective. In which sense the growth of the membership of our constituency goes against it? I'd rather say that the expansion of the number of ALSes increases the chances of getting increased recognition in the future. If it were true that, as you say,
I view the ALAC/RALO/ALS construct as a monumental failure that cannot be saved by the expenditure of additional funding or time.
then one could wonder why ICANN should give a third or fourth try to it, restarting from zero on yet another model, rather than getting rid of the idea altogether. In the end, one would hope that you would understand that the fact that you, personally, do not like this model must be compared with the fact that about 100 organizations from the five corners of the world find value in it. I respect your opinion, but it seems to me that you still fail to consider that other people or other cultures might have good reasons to have different views on this matter. On the other hand, we definitely have to increase the ALAC's attitudes towards involving the ALSes more regularly and deeply into our debates. This new setup of global + regional mailing lists where messages flow in all directions, though a bit chaotic, seems to have prompted many more interventions by ALS representatives. I am actually wondering whether we should rather have one single global list to this effect, keeping regional lists only for strictly regional discussions. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------