Comments on GNSO improvements
Wendy, I agree with your assessment that this Statement completely lacks substance. It offers no specific counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC itself. What value is there in declaring "we do believe that the Internet end-users voice must be included in the new GNSO" without formulating a means by which this may be accomplished? ... and then there are the comments that make one want to vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large community has been actively engaged in developing and implementing new approaches to a working group modality for policy development, some of the experiences we have had in that process may prove salutary." The ALAC is absolutely clueless when it comes to running a working group, and their WGs have been abject failures -- asking the GNSO to consider ALAC achievements in this area is laughable and makes the ALAC look like fools and simpletons. I'm starting to think that whoever penned this Statement is living in some alternate universe where reality rarely intrudes. If you ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no continuing purpose in the ICANN structure", this Statement would go a long way toward making that case. The Board is looking for real solutions to deal with issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the days of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real solutions. The best thing that one can say about this Statement is that if it were printed on toilet paper it might ultimately serve some useful purpose. ____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
As I share with some, ( due the fact I still member of BGC WG hence my opinion brings some conflict) my point is - since we believe users shall be represented at GNSO, we need to answer the question: does this representation should be done by ALAC or by the "undefined" entity registrants? Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Alameda Santos 1470 #1407 Tel - +55113266.6253 Mob- +55118181.1464 vanda@uol.com.br Before print think about the Environment "The information contained in this message - and attached files - is restricted, and its confidentiality protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and notify the sender immediately. Please be advised that the improper use of the aforementioned information will create grounds for legal action." "As informações existentes nesta mensagem e nos arquivos anexados são para uso restrito, com sigilo protegido por lei. Caso não seja o destinatário, favor apagar esta mensagem e notificar o remetente. O uso impróprio das informações desta mensagem será tratado conforme a legislação em vigor." -----Mensagem original----- De: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] Em nome de Danny Younger Enviada em: terça-feira, 8 de abril de 2008 08:25 Para: wendy@seltzer.com Cc: At-Large Worldwide Assunto: [At-Large] Comments on GNSO improvements Wendy, I agree with your assessment that this Statement completely lacks substance. It offers no specific counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC itself. What value is there in declaring "we do believe that the Internet end-user’s voice must be included in the new GNSO" without formulating a means by which this may be accomplished? ... and then there are the comments that make one want to vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large community has been actively engaged in developing and implementing new approaches to a working group modality for policy development, some of the experiences we have had in that process may prove salutary." The ALAC is absolutely clueless when it comes to running a working group, and their WGs have been abject failures -- asking the GNSO to consider ALAC achievements in this area is laughable and makes the ALAC look like fools and simpletons. I'm starting to think that whoever penned this Statement is living in some alternate universe where reality rarely intrudes. If you ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no continuing purpose in the ICANN structure", this Statement would go a long way toward making that case. The Board is looking for real solutions to deal with issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the days of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real solutions. The best thing that one can say about this Statement is that if it were printed on toilet paper it might ultimately serve some useful purpose. ____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com _______________________________________________ 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://atlarge.icann.org
Danny: When I met you in LA, I thought that you were the best. Now I can see my mistake. Your comments are not constructive, I'm sure your comments have been made with some intentionality. I'm thinking that may be you are an element used by others (I don't Know who) to disqualify the ALAC's work, or.... you bought the ideas of who try to delete ALAC of the map. I worry so much, the possibility that one smart guy, only be a .......... You can say this in a better way, making a critic, and maybe in some points we can find coincidences but..... It is not the first time that you say how much useless is ALAC and their members, but what are you proposals?. please tell the people what are your true intentions and how you can give solutions to this, could be clear, could be honest. thank's and sorry for my bad english. Me gustaria usted pudiera entender mi idioma, por que de esta manera estariamos en igual posicion de mantener esta discucion. Lamentablemente mi ingles no es perfecto y por lo que se Ud. solo habla su lengua, es una pena que Ud. solo piense y hable en ingles estadounidense. Me gustaria verlo a Ud hacer sus "aportes" en espanol o en otro idioma diferente al ingles, are you able?. Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423www.sitioderecho.com.arwww.densi.com.ar > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 04:24:32 -0700> From: dannyyounger@yahoo.com> To: wendy@seltzer.com> CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [At-Large] Comments on GNSO improvements> > Wendy,> > I agree with your assessment that this Statement> completely lacks substance. It offers no specific> counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a> document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC itself.> > What value is there in declaring "we do believe that> the Internet end-user’s voice must be included in the> new GNSO" without formulating a means by which this> may be accomplished?> > ... and then there are the comments that make one want> to vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large> community has been actively engaged in developing and> implementing new approaches to a working group> modality for policy development, some of the> experiences we have had in that process may prove> salutary."> > The ALAC is absolutely clueless when it comes to> running a working group, and their WGs have been> abject failures -- asking the GNSO to consider ALAC> achievements in this area is laughable and makes the> ALAC look like fools and simpletons. I'm starting to> think that whoever penned this Statement is living in> some alternate universe where reality rarely intrudes.> > > If you ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no> continuing purpose in the ICANN structure", this> Statement would go a long way toward making that case.> > The Board is looking for real solutions to deal with> issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the days> of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real> solutions. The best thing that one can say about this> Statement is that if it were printed on toilet paper > it might ultimately serve some useful purpose.> > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com> > _______________________________________________> 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://atlarge.icann.org _________________________________________________________________ Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas novedades del mundo deportivo. http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/
Hello Carlos, When I look at the ALAC I see a group of people that won't fight for at-large representation. I see a bunch of Working Groups wherein nothing gets done. I see a general discussion list where ALAC members from most of the regions usually have absolutely nothing to say on policy issues. I see a group yearly willing to waste a million dollars of registrant monies (and with their hand always out for even more funding). If you recall, ICANN shut down the Protocol Supporting Organization because it had no continuing purpose as an ICANN structure. I see no continuing purpose in the ALAC. The ALAC model is a failure that produces no substantive policy recommendations. In an evolutionary process, failures result in extinction. It's time for the ALAC to be replaced by a different model. You asked for my proposals... they have been public for some time now -- see my proposal to establish a Registrant Advisory Committee at http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01080.html I have assembled a team of eighteen individuals that will be fleshing out this proposal. A domain name has been registered for the project -- registrantadvisorycommittee.info Hosting was purchased yesterday. The website will be up in a matter of days and consultations will then commence. In ICANN's history, representative bodies have been eliminated or replaced (one example is the DNSO General Assembly that disappeared as a representative unit in the wake of the 2002 Reform); I see no compelling reason to waste more money on a non-productive ALAC. Have a look at the SSAC -- at least they produce substantive documents with research, findings and recommendations. What does the ALAC produce other than brief Statements that are the product of only a few minutes worth of discussion? The ALAC doesn't serve the needs of the at-large community. It never has. It was built as a playpen to keep Civil Society occupied after At-Large representational rights were taken away. No amount of reform will change an institution in which elected representatives rarely choose to contribute in an online environment and almost never choose to engage in meaningful policy work. It is time for another model. best regards, Danny --- carlos aguirre <carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com> wrote:
Danny: When I met you in LA, I thought that you were the best. Now I can see my mistake. Your comments are not constructive, I'm sure your comments have been made with some intentionality. I'm thinking that may be you are an element used by others (I don't Know who) to disqualify the ALAC's work, or.... you bought the ideas of who try to delete ALAC of the map. I worry so much, the possibility that one smart guy, only be a .......... You can say this in a better way, making a critic, and maybe in some points we can find coincidences but..... It is not the first time that you say how much useless is ALAC and their members, but what are you proposals?. please tell the people what are your true intentions and how you can give solutions to this, could be clear, could be honest. thank's and sorry for my bad english. Me gustaria usted pudiera entender mi idioma, por que de esta manera estariamos en igual posicion de mantener esta discucion. Lamentablemente mi ingles no es perfecto y por lo que se Ud. solo habla su lengua, es una pena que Ud. solo piense y hable en ingles estadounidense. Me gustaria verlo a Ud hacer sus "aportes" en espanol o en otro idioma diferente al ingles, are you able?. Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423www.sitioderecho.com.arwww.densi.com.ar > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 04:24:32 -0700> From: dannyyounger@yahoo.com> To: wendy@seltzer.com> CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [At-Large] Comments on GNSO improvements> > Wendy,> > I agree with your assessment that this Statement> completely lacks substance. It offers no specific> counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a> document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC itself.> > What value is there in declaring "we do believe that> the Internet end-users voice must be included in the> new GNSO" without formulating a means by which this> may be accomplished?> > ... and then there are the comments that make one want> to vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large> community has been actively engaged in developing and> implementing new approaches to a working group> modality for policy development, some of the> experiences we have had in that process may prove> salutary."> > The ALAC is absolutely clueless when it comes to> running a working group, and their WGs have been> abject failures -- asking the GNSO to consider ALAC> achievements in this area is laughable and makes the> ALAC look like fools and simpletons. I'm starting to> think that whoever penned this Statement is living in> some alternate universe where reality rarely intrudes.> > > If you ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no> continuing purpose in the ICANN structure", this> Statement would go a long way toward making that case.> > The Board is looking for real solutions to deal with> issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the days> of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real> solutions. The best thing that one can say about this> Statement is that if it were printed on toilet paper > it might ultimately serve some useful purpose.> > > >
____________________________________________________________________________________>
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com>
_______________________________________________> 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://atlarge.icann.org
_________________________________________________________________
Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas novedades del mundo deportivo. http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/
____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
Danny, I know your rants on the matter for years. IMHO they only translate your inability to propose something coherent to organise the ALAC for it to serve the urgent needs that ICANN has of them, and it does not properly (I agree with you) manage. The question is not to save one million, but to use that small million for the multi-billion worth advantage ICANN should get from ALAC to the benefit of the whole community. You do not realise it, but your competent comments on ICANN issues is one of the most dramatic problem of ICANN, because it gives credibility to such rants which in turn defeat the ICANN ALAC oriented interests. ICANN is a trade organisation, managing registrars and relating with ISPs. @large are lead customers. What you harass ICANN about is to disregard them. In this capacity, IMHO you harm ICANN through this list far more than ever Jeff did by at least two degrees of magnitude: you hit the core, and you are intelligent. Please try for once to think the other way around. Document how you would spend the ALAC million to the best advabntage of ICANN through @larges. As you started doing at the WG-Review a long ago. jfc At 19:56 08/04/2008, Danny Younger wrote:
Hello Carlos,
When I look at the ALAC I see a group of people that won't fight for at-large representation. I see a bunch of Working Groups wherein nothing gets done. I see a general discussion list where ALAC members from most of the regions usually have absolutely nothing to say on policy issues. I see a group yearly willing to waste a million dollars of registrant monies (and with their hand always out for even more funding).
If you recall, ICANN shut down the Protocol Supporting Organization because it had no continuing purpose as an ICANN structure. I see no continuing purpose in the ALAC.
The ALAC model is a failure that produces no substantive policy recommendations. In an evolutionary process, failures result in extinction. It's time for the ALAC to be replaced by a different model.
You asked for my proposals... they have been public for some time now -- see my proposal to establish a Registrant Advisory Committee at http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01080.html
I have assembled a team of eighteen individuals that will be fleshing out this proposal. A domain name has been registered for the project -- registrantadvisorycommittee.info
Hosting was purchased yesterday. The website will be up in a matter of days and consultations will then commence.
In ICANN's history, representative bodies have been eliminated or replaced (one example is the DNSO General Assembly that disappeared as a representative unit in the wake of the 2002 Reform); I see no compelling reason to waste more money on a non-productive ALAC.
Have a look at the SSAC -- at least they produce substantive documents with research, findings and recommendations. What does the ALAC produce other than brief Statements that are the product of only a few minutes worth of discussion?
The ALAC doesn't serve the needs of the at-large community. It never has. It was built as a playpen to keep Civil Society occupied after At-Large representational rights were taken away.
No amount of reform will change an institution in which elected representatives rarely choose to contribute in an online environment and almost never choose to engage in meaningful policy work.
It is time for another model.
best regards, Danny
--- carlos aguirre <carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com> wrote:
Danny: When I met you in LA, I thought that you were the best. Now I can see my mistake. Your comments are not constructive, I'm sure your comments have been made with some intentionality. I'm thinking that may be you are an element used by others (I don't Know who) to disqualify the ALAC's work, or.... you bought the ideas of who try to delete ALAC of the map. I worry so much, the possibility that one smart guy, only be a .......... You can say this in a better way, making a critic, and maybe in some points we can find coincidences but..... It is not the first time that you say how much useless is ALAC and their members, but what are you proposals?. please tell the people what are your true intentions and how you can give solutions to this, could be clear, could be honest. thank's and sorry for my bad english. Me gustaria usted pudiera entender mi idioma, por que de esta manera estariamos en igual posicion de mantener esta discucion. Lamentablemente mi ingles no es perfecto y por lo que se Ud. solo habla su lengua, es una pena que Ud. solo piense y hable en ingles estadounidense. Me gustaria verlo a Ud hacer sus "aportes" en espanol o en otro idioma diferente al ingles, are you able?. Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423www.sitioderecho.com.arwww.densi.com.ar > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 04:24:32 -0700> From: dannyyounger@yahoo.com> To: wendy@seltzer.com> CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [At-Large] Comments on GNSO improvements> > Wendy,> > I agree with your assessment that this Statement> completely lacks substance. It offers no specific> counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a> document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC itself.> > What value is there in declaring "we do believe that> the Internet end-user's voice must be included in the> new GNSO" without formulating a means by which this> may be accomplished?> > ... and then there are the comments that make one want> to vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large> community has been actively engaged in developing and> implementing new approaches to a working group> modality for policy development, some of the> experiences we have had in that process may prove> salutary."> > The ALAC is absolutely clueless when it comes to> running a working group, and their WGs have been> abject failures -- asking the GNSO to consider ALAC> achievements in this area is laughable and makes the> ALAC look like fools and simpletons. I'm starting to> think that whoever penned this Statement is living in> some alternate universe where reality rarely intrudes.> > > If you ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no> continuing purpose in the ICANN structure", this> Statement would go a long way toward making that case.> > The Board is looking for real solutions to deal with> issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the days> of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real> solutions. The best thing that one can say about this> Statement is that if it were printed on toilet paper > it might ultimately serve some useful purpose.> > > >
____________________________________________________________________________________>
You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com>
_______________________________________________> 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://atlarge.icann.org
_________________________________________________________________
Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas novedades del mundo deportivo. http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/
____________________________________________________________________________________ You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com
_______________________________________________ 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://atlarge.icann.org
Danny:
When I look at the ALAC I see a group of people that> won't fight for at-large representation. I don't agree with you, into ALAC there are people who attempt to fight for the at large community, and every day in their places of residence make a lot of things for the end users interests. ALAC is only an advisory committee and must to work in relation with bylaws, so must be organic and respectfull with the rules imposed. I see a> bunch of Working Groups wherein nothing gets done. ALAC is a new structure after RALOS and is starting to work in a different way than before, is like a child when try to start to walk. But we are learning so fast. I> see a general discussion list where ALAC members from> most of the regions usually have absolutely nothing to> say on policy issues. It's true but this is caused by the participation policy of ICANN and the lack of budget. ICANN have to translate every document to every languajes, in order people of everywhere(users) knows about the ICANN reality. Many Als's around the world are NGO's without money to do that ICANN have to. the participation is essential in this organization, specially the participation of end users, wich is the group that pay and give the money for mantein the organization. I see a group yearly willing to> waste a million dollars of registrant monies (and with> their hand always out for even more funding). It's true, and need more, much more to achieved the participation. I don' t know if we need for ALAC committee, but we need more to translate documents, to improve the transmition of ideas to the end users. > > If you recall, ICANN shut down the Protocol Supporting> Organization because it had no continuing purpose as> an ICANN structure. I see no continuing purpose in> the ALAC. I don't agree again. we need (ICANN need) more participation and give importance to the At Large community and their representants in ALAC.> > The ALAC model is a failure that produces no> substantive policy recommendations. Every model would be improved. The community need to know in order to can participate and make proposals about policies. In an> evolutionary process, failures result in extinction. ALAC need more time, not much more, to became in a most important committee into ICANN. Today the bad or good participation is only for english speakers, there aren't participation for non english speakers, because they don't know what happen into the organization, and the ALs's haven't resources to translate or communicate this.> It's time for the ALAC to be replaced by a different> model. As I said before, every model could be improved> > You asked for my proposals... they have been public> for some time now -- see my proposal to establish a> Registrant Advisory Committee at> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01080.html> > I have assembled a team of eighteen individuals that> will be fleshing out this proposal. A domain name has> been registered for the project --> registrantadvisorycommittee.info> > Hosting was purchased yesterday. The website will be> up in a matter of days and consultations will then> commence. Sorry Danny, but you have a different vision, you can't see the same than end users. your solutions will be different and you speack english only, an your domain mane is a web in english, and you think with the (from) US english perspective, and Internet is not only for US. I can see this in your proposal in relation with JPA, the conclusion of this document show in a clear way your position, and I particularly disagree whit this. > > In ICANN's history, representative bodies have been> eliminated or replaced (one example is the DNSO> General Assembly that disappeared as a representative> unit in the wake of the 2002 Reform); I see no> compelling reason to waste more money on a> non-productive ALAC. again, is only your partial vision. you are a very important people into ICANN, because you have a long participation , but you aren't the only person into ICANN world> > Have a look at the SSAC -- at least they produce> substantive documents with research, findings and> recommendations. What does the ALAC produce other> than brief Statements that are the product of only > few minutes worth of discussion? come back to the same, we need participation, specially participation of the non english speakers, time and more founds.> > The ALAC doesn't serve the needs of the at-large> community. It never has. It was built as a playpen> to keep Civil Society occupied after At-Large> representational rights were taken away. the solution is more participation, ICANN have to improve the mechanisms of participation. In ALAC we are working for that.> > No amount of reform will change an institution in> which elected representatives rarely choose to> contribute in an online environment and almost never> choose to engage in meaningful policy work. The AT Large representtives, ALAC members by RALOs, are part of the society, are end users and also need to know, in much cases (the mayority around the world) they don't talk english. Sorry to be insistent but I'm convinced that I say.> > It is time for another model. Always is a good time to improve. but your words in a first mail were very innappropriated, talking the people understand, but talking in a polite way.> > best regards, the best for you> DannyMi contestacion estaba pensada para hacerla en espanol, pero prefiero que Ud la entienda, aunque reconozco mi mal ingles. gracias por su esfuerzo en tratar de entender. Todo es perfectible, tambien el modo con que Ud se expreso en su primer correo. Por eso le pido que la proxima vez se dirija con propiedad hacia personas que merecen el mismo respeto que Ud.. de nuevo gracias.
Carlos Dionisio Aguirre abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina - *54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423 www.sitioderecho.com.ar www.densi.com.ar > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 10:56:37 -0700> From: dannyyounger@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: [At-Large] Comments on GNSO improvements> To: carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com; wendy@seltzer.com> CC: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> > Hello Carlos,> > When I look at the ALAC I see a group of people that> won't fight for at-large representation. I see a> bunch of Working Groups wherein nothing gets done. I> see a general discussion list where ALAC members from> most of the regions usually have absolutely nothing to> say on policy issues. I see a group yearly willing to> waste a million dollars of registrant monies (and with> their hand always out for even more funding).> > If you recall, ICANN shut down the Protocol Supporting> Organization because it had no continuing purpose as> an ICANN structure. I see no continuing purpose in> the ALAC.> > The ALAC model is a failure that produces no> substantive policy recommendations. In an> evolutionary process, failures result in extinction. > It's time for the ALAC to be replaced by a different> model.> > You asked for my proposals... they have been public> for some time now -- see my proposal to establish a> Registrant Advisory Committee at> http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/ga-200709/msg01080.html> > I have assembled a team of eighteen individuals that> will be fleshing out this proposal. A domain name has> been registered for the project --> registrantadvisorycommittee.info> > Hosting was purchased yesterday. The website will be> up in a matter of days and consultations will then> commence.> > In ICANN's history, representative bodies have been> eliminated or replaced (one example is the DNSO> General Assembly that disappeared as a representative> unit in the wake of the 2002 Reform); I see no> compelling reason to waste more money on a> non-productive ALAC. > > Have a look at the SSAC -- at least they produce> substantive documents with research, findings and> recommendations. What does the ALAC produce other> than brief Statements that are the product of only a> few minutes worth of discussion?> > The ALAC doesn't serve the needs of the at-large> community. It never has. It was built as a playpen> to keep Civil Society occupied after At-Large> representational rights were taken away. > > No amount of reform will change an institution in> which elected representatives rarely choose to> contribute in an online environment and almost never> choose to engage in meaningful policy work.> > It is time for another model. > > best regards,> Danny> > > > --- carlos aguirre <carlosaguirre62@hotmail.com>> wrote:> > > > > Danny: When I met you in LA, I thought that> > you were the best. Now I can see my mistake. Your> > comments are not constructive, I'm sure your> > comments have been made with some intentionality.> > I'm thinking that may be you are an element used by> > others (I don't Know who) to disqualify the ALAC's> > work, or.... you bought the ideas of who try to> > delete ALAC of the map. I worry so much, the> > possibility that one smart guy, only be a ..........> > You can say this in a better way, making a> > critic, and maybe in some points we can find> > coincidences but..... It is not the first> > time that you say how much useless is ALAC and their> > members, but what are you proposals?. please tell> > the people what are your true intentions and how you> > can give solutions to this, could be clear, could be> > honest. thank's and sorry for my bad english. > > Me gustaria usted pudiera entender mi idioma, por> > que de esta manera estariamos en igual posicion de> > mantener esta discucion. Lamentablemente mi ingles> > no es perfecto y por lo que se Ud. solo habla su> > lengua, es una pena que Ud. solo piense y hable en> > ingles estadounidense. Me gustaria verlo a Ud hacer> > sus "aportes" en espanol o en otro idioma diferente> > al ingles, are you able?. Carlos> > Dionisio Aguirre> > abogado - Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina> > -*54-351-424-2123 /> > 423-5423www.sitioderecho.com.arwww.densi.com.ar >> > Date: Tue, 8 Apr 2008 04:24:32 -0700> From:> > dannyyounger@yahoo.com> To: wendy@seltzer.com> CC:> > alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: [At-Large]> > Comments on GNSO improvements> > Wendy,> > I agree> > with your assessment that this Statement> completely> > lacks substance. It offers no specific>> > counter-proposals to the BGC work-product. As a>> > document, it is almost as useless as the ALAC> > itself.> > What value is there in declaring "we do> > believe that> the Internet end-user’s voice must be> > included in the> new GNSO" without formulating a> > means by which this> may be accomplished?> > ... and> > then there are the comments that make one want> to> > vomit, such as, "Since as mentioned the At-Large>> > community has been actively engaged in developing> > and> implementing new approaches to a working group>> > modality for policy development, some of the>> > experiences we have had in that process may prove>> > salutary."> > The ALAC is absolutely clueless when> > it comes to> running a working group, and their WGs> > have been> abject failures -- asking the GNSO to> > consider ALAC> achievements in this area is> > laughable and makes the> ALAC look like fools and> > simpletons. I'm starting to> think that whoever> > penned this Statement is living in> some alternate> > universe where reality rarely intrudes.> > > If you> > ever needed proof that ALAC serves "no> continuing> > purpose in the ICANN structure", this> Statement> > would go a long way toward making that case.> > The> > Board is looking for real solutions to deal with>> > issues that have been plaguing the GNSO since the> > days> of the DNSO. This Statement offers up no real>> > solutions. The best thing that one can say about> > this> Statement is that if it were printed on toilet> > paper > it might ultimately serve some useful> > purpose.> > > >> >> ____________________________________________________________________________________>> > You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one> > month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. >> > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com>> > > _______________________________________________>> > 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://atlarge.icann.org> >> _________________________________________________________________> > Ingresá ya a MSN Deportes y enterate de las últimas> > novedades del mundo deportivo.> > http://msn.foxsports.com/fslasc/> > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________> You rock. That's why Blockbuster's offering you one month of Blockbuster Total Access, No Cost. > http://tc.deals.yahoo.com/tc/blockbuster/text5.com _________________________________________________________________ Descargá ya gratis y viví la experiencia Windows Live. http://www.descubrewindowslive.com/latam/index.html
participants (4)
-
carlos aguirre -
Danny Younger -
JFC Morfin -
Vanda Scartezini UOL