On Fri, 9 Aug 2019 at 11:09, Tijani BEN JEMAA <tijani.benjemaa@topnet.tn> wrote: I had the same understanding of the NCSG/NCUC. If they are in the GNSO,
it’s because they are registrant. But unfortunately, the situation changed and now, they accept individuals and organizations with no relation with the gTLDs. They now define themselves as representing the civil society, and all non commercial users.
Hi Tijani, Thanks for your explanation. What this means is that the structure of ICANN has broken down and that constituent areas are not serving their intended purposes. Perhaps it is time to get direction from the Board on this. It should not be ALAC's task to clean up the problem in other constituencies or act as a repository for disaffected community members who should be better served alesewhere. Personally I would like some clarity regarding whether ALAC is meant to represent registrants as well as non-registrant users, to clarify the distinction beyond the vagueness of the Bylaws. I see no conflict with registrants being in ALAC, so long as the shared mandate and values there are to act for non-registrant end users. It is now my experience that the needs of the two groups -- registrants and non-registrants -- are not the same. They are certainly of different priorities, some things matter to registrants that don't matter at all to non-registrants (as I have indicated elsewhere), and occasionally their interests are in complete opposition (on the issue of registrant privacy versus accountability, for example). Based on your observation, I would consider it a priority to clarify at the Board level the roles of ALAC vis NCUC. And if NCUC is not serving its purpose, either its leadership needs to be changed or a new constituency (along the lines of NPOC) needs to be created within the NCPH. This ambiguity has been the source of significant challenge and difficulty in speaking for both groups. And it has become a reason for ALAC's poor perception outside. Cheers, - Evan