-----Original Message----- From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> I'm generally OK with the MOU, but share Luc's questions.

1. Are we really going to get away with the MOU's parag. 6.4?

We won't know if we don't try.

2. Why do we need parag. 6.5?

I agree that 6.5 is unnecessary. My group is involved as an ALS to represent the POV of its membership, and cannot pretend to do more than that. While our goal is public progress, we do that through the advancement of a specific form of advocacy and don't claim to represent all viewpoints. ws: That's precisely the point of including it. Since ALSs, even many of them, cannot represent all viewpoints, this gives members of the general public a way to intervene to speak for themselves. We can step way out in front of the other RALOs with this level of involvement. --Wendy