It should be emphasised that we have to look at these things on a case-by-case basis to at least some degree. We would expect, for example, that a person who was from outside the ALAC who wishes to serve in a liaison capacity which would require funding from ICANN to support would be someone who, for example:

* Is clearly knowledgeable about the area they propose to be a liaison to - which would include having worked on the issues related to their proposed liaison role as a member of the At-Large community in an active way preceding their possible appointment;

* Knows the people in the ICANN body to which they would be a liaison, preferably with relationships already in place with at least some of the main players;

* Will commit to the time required to be effective in their new role - which would include measuring up to the standards required of liaisons in the ALAC's Rules of Procedure, reporting regularly to the community, working actively on At-Large policy working groups that relate to their liaison role or the body they are a liaison to, and the like;

* Has been a part of the At-Large community and a participant in their RALO's work in a meaningful way (meaningful to their RALO at least, and hopefully meaningful to the whole of the community).

I hope everyone understands that the above isn't meant to be carefully scrutinised as a precise criteria or anything like that, but rather to give a sense of what kind of person would be appropriate for receiving travel support for being a liaison - in some cases quite considerable funding. After all, the funds which are used to send a liaison to the necessary meetings and the like are coming from funds which would otherwise be spent on other members of the community - I feel sure that you all would want to feel that if such an appointment were made, that the person in the liaison role would be felt by the community to be providing 'value for money' to the whole community (to use a UK expression).

As always, please feel free to ask questions.