I've posted this to the wiki
(
https://community.icann.org/x/FQC1C).
The statement is a merger of the one previously distributed and the
re-write that Jonathan did. There is one addition in the last paragraph
pointing out that this is not the case of being unhappy because "we
did not get our way", but a real concern with the viability of the
proposal. The "not get your way" has been stated a number of
times and came up again during the GNSO Council meeting today, and needs
to be explicitly refuted.
=========================
Addendum to the ALAC Minority Statement to the EPDP Phase 2 Final
Report
The Members of the At-Large Advisory Committee (ALAC)
appreciate the opportunity to submit this Addendum to the statement that
was submitted on 29 July 2020.
The ALAC, along with its EPDP team, has now had the opportunity to review
and discuss the statements submitted by the BC/IPC, GAC and SSAC, along
with those submitted by the other EPDP Member groups.
Although the ALAC and the BC, IPC, GAC and the SSAC each took a somewhat
different approach to addressing our positions in respect to the report,
the ALAC is in general agreement with the positions taken in the GAC,
SSAC and BC/IPC statements. In particular, the ALAC appreciates the
in-depth and insightful analysis provided by the GAC, SSAC and
BC/IPC.
Dissenting on the outcomes of what has been over a year of very
challenging debate is not something that the ALAC has taken lightly. To
be clear, this is not a situation as has been implied that we are
dissenting because ?we have not gotten our way?. Proceeding without
addressing the issues that we believe are critical to the success of an
SSAD will result in a system that will not meet needs of the users of the
SSAD, with little opportunity to significantly correct those problems
going forward. We hope that the GNSO and if applicable the Board will
take this into consideration as this process moves forward.