I am in complete agreement with Evan's view. As ICANN is trying to move away from the engineering to market perspective, this view becomes very important for ALAC to embrace. - Lerato Ma ________________________________ From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> To: At-Large Worldwide <at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Cc: ALAC <alac@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Sent: Sun, November 28, 2010 1:11:47 AM Subject: [At-Large] "Business" users (was Re: FW: Our choice for the ICANN Board) Hi again, On 27 November 2010 12:37, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn@gmail.com> wrote:

...

*As more and more at Large leadership positions are filled by people from

...

...

the business constituency, It is becoming very important for ALAC and

at

...

...

...

Large to preserve at Large as a user's constituency to TRULY balance the business stakeholder group. Any leadership position within ALAC and at Large should be occupied by persons with ample concern for the end user.*

...

I must say that I'm perplexed by the nature of this question, and I take it personally even though I am not a candidate for Director.

Please don't.

I've changed the subject because my response no longer has anything to do with the election of Director. I explain this in the hope of changing some attitudes -- not about Director, but on larger issues surrounding the very nature of At-Large. Here is why I take this statement very personally. I work for a University, but I also own my own consulting firm and I am a partner in a startup venture. On travel visa applications my occupation is just listed as "businessman" or "consultant". My name has also been put forward to become one of the coming year's ALAC Officers, which certainly qualifies as an "At-Large leadership position". So I ask... Am I one of these "people from the Business Constituency" who needs to be balanced by others from a "user's constituency"? What views have I expressed in any policy work that would lead anyone to believe that I don't advocate from a user's perspective by virtue of my being a businessman? To what extent do my views need to be balanced ... and by what? I am simply making the point here is that drawing such lines in At-Large between "business" and "non-business" is needlessly divisive and impedes our ability to make progress. While Chair of NARALO I made sure that there were Conflict of Interest guidelines and that all individual users have to submit Statements of Interest. Employees, owners and agents of contracted parties may not serve any NARALO leadership position. I don't know what other regions did but that was our approach. As far as I am concerned, a business association (not primarily involved with Internet infrastructure business) has as much right to be an ALS as a non-governmental agency or ISOC chapter, and deserves as much respect for its views. That is what At-Large is all about. End-users take many forms and it it dangerous to spend too much effort segmenting them. The only business users that concerns At-Large are those that have contractual relationships with ICANN, those who want to have such relationships, and their resellers and agents. IMO we need to acknowledge that At-Large means essentially everyone who is *not* a contracted party. We're all end-users and our voices all count.The president of Citibank has to use his computer just like you or me, and is affected by spam and phishing as much as us. IMO segmenting end-users, and going as far as saying the views of some users must be "balanced" by others, is what I find bothersome. Please reconsider this approach ... not just with regard to the Board member, but towards At-Large in general. - Evan _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org