Kleinwächter ha scritto:
I fully support Dominik,
Westlake does not understand the role of At Large in the ICANN context
More precisely, Westlake has been instructed to review the effectiveness of the current structure in reaching the purpose of the ALAC as described in the ICANN Bylaws: "to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users". The idea that the At Large has a role "in the broader context of Internet Governance", or that the purpose of the ALAC includes ensuring the accountability and democracy of ICANN, is entirely yours (Jeanette's, etc.), and while the accountability of ICANN to the general public is a fundamental issue which I too find very important, it is not what is written in the ICANN Bylaws as the purpose of the ALAC. To a certain extent, it is you and Dominik who do not understand the role of At Large in the ICANN structure :-) (seriously, I think that one of the issues is that different people have very different understandings of the purpose of the ALAC) As I said today in the meeting, the issue about the accountability of ICANN pertains more to the discussions about the post-JPA status and structure of ICANN. Perhaps the ALAC would do more good in making better use of its representative on the President's Strategy Committee, and in advocating for a broader and more open discussion in that process. -- vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <-------- --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/ <--------