Dominik and all, If the below outlined report is correct, than it is clear that commercial interests have a significant advantage and the majority of power in the GNSO as Registries and Registrars are essentially commercial entities/businesses. Ergo no balance and essentially nothing has changed in the GNSO other than the "Names" of the specific representative groups. Further there is NO Independent Registrant representative in this proposed structure, and NO user-non-registrant reoresentative/ALAC. So I will now predict that there will be no significant change in the bahavior of Registries or Registrars and the abuses that have been occuring with increasing frequency will continue with even more increasing frequency. I will also predict here and now that with this proposed structure the IPC will get whatever it wants. Dominik Filipp wrote:

Cheryl,

After having read the last WG output at

https://st.icann.org/data/workspaces/alac/attachments/at_large_advisory_

committee:20080729041513-0-3574/files/FinalReport-GNSO-ImprovementsWG.pd

f

it seems like the proposed GNSO restructuralization could be as follows (Attachment A)

------------------------------ 2 houses - contracted and non-contracted parties/constituencies, 2 parties in each house

House 1 - Contracted party house consists of 2 (registry and registrar) constituencies House 2 - Non-contracted party house consists of 2 (commercial and non-commercial) parties/constituencies

that is, 4 parties/constituencies in both the houses collectively.

The GNSO Council (given that the lowest proposed number of members are

considered)

House 1 Registries - 3 members Registrars - 3 members

House 2 Commercial - 5 members Non-commercial - 5 members

and also

Equal number of votes between registries and registrars. Equal number of votes between commercial and non-commercial users. ------------------------------

Do I understand the proposal correctly, Cheryl?

If so, there is a question I could not find an answer to.

Q: What is the proposed number of votes for each of the four GNSO Council parties?

Thanks

Dominik

-----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Cheryl Langdon-Orr Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 7:06 AM To: alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org Cc: 'ALAC internal list' Subject: [At-Large] Report to the ICANN Board of Directors from WG on GNSOCouncil Restructuring

At-Large. please note that earlier today the ALAC Executive and our representative on this WG Alan Greenberg, met and discussed our desire

to have a formal ALAC Statement to the Board on this matter.

Please see our Wiki page https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?at_large_advisory_committee to find a link to the report of the WG from this now completed process, and also under Announcements to find an short background piece from the report and a note as to the mechanism for the ALAC to review our sub-committee and Rep statement appended to it, to be endorsed (in an expanded form if so desired) as an ALAC Statement to the Board.

ALAC this serves as the start of the 7 day minimum notice required for a formal vote to be taken (between meetings) on this matter and in the

next 24hrs further background documents and proposed expansion of this

statement will be posted and a Big Pulse vote be created for the purpose of recording your views to 1. Endorse the proposed document an ALAC Statement, 2. Vote against the proposal or 3. Abstain.

More in the next 24hrs.

CLO

_______________________________________________ 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

_______________________________________________ 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

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k 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