Request regarding your views on GNSO Improvements into Board Discussion
Wendy, Thank you for your comment on this topic. I am sure that if asked you will indicate that: 1. The ALAC never took a formal vote on the Statement 2. No members of the ALAC from regions other than NA expressed any views whatsoever on the topic on the at-large discussion list (which is not surprising as they rarely express any opinions on anything). 3. The work of the ad-hoc GNSO Improvements Working Group was totally non-transparent (not even an archived discussion list). 4. The broad At-Large community was not afforded an opportunity to discuss the Joint document prior to its release. 5. There are those in the at-large that do not support the concept of eliminating Non-Com representation in the GNSO. 6. Some in the at-large view the statement that "At-Large would not accept anything less than 50% of the voting power of the Non-Commercial Interest Group", as ludicrous. 7. Some regard the ALAC push for a multilingual approach within the GNSO to be a foolish waste of money and point to the horrid expenditures on the part of the ALAC for contracted (yet unused) translation services. 8. The comment "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", is an insult to the intelligence of the community.
This may explain why everything has been made for france@large not to be able to vote any time soon :-) jfc At 13:22 29/05/2008, Danny Younger wrote:
Wendy,
Thank you for your comment on this topic. I am sure that if asked you will indicate that:
1. The ALAC never took a formal vote on the Statement 2. No members of the ALAC from regions other than NA expressed any views whatsoever on the topic on the at-large discussion list (which is not surprising as they rarely express any opinions on anything). 3. The work of the ad-hoc GNSO Improvements Working Group was totally non-transparent (not even an archived discussion list). 4. The broad At-Large community was not afforded an opportunity to discuss the Joint document prior to its release. 5. There are those in the at-large that do not support the concept of eliminating Non-Com representation in the GNSO. 6. Some in the at-large view the statement that "At-Large would not accept anything less than 50% of the voting power of the Non-Commercial Interest Group", as ludicrous. 7. Some regard the ALAC push for a multilingual approach within the GNSO to be a foolish waste of money and point to the horrid expenditures on the part of the ALAC for contracted (yet unused) translation services. 8. The comment "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", is an insult to the intelligence of the community.
_______________________________________________ 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
participants (2)
-
Danny Younger -
JFC Morfin