Dear All: Please follow the link to access an English-language recording of the discussions at https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?discussion_on_the_raa . This information is especially useful to our ALAC representatives who will vote by Jan 8 2009 on the ALAC Response to the RAA Amendments. To my mind, the process is always important. But it is the results that matter. So I take the position that in matters pertaining to the contractual vehicle that is the RAA, the far more impactful problem is one of weakness in ICANN's enforcement of the admittedly modest contractual provisions that now protect registrants. As I understand it, the objective here is a binding consensus policy that would impact behaviors of registry/registrars for the better. So by design, there is a ways to go in this process before that light dawns. I will reach for the low-hanging fruit here. Speaking as the UWI ALS representative and despite the assertions of the ALAC GNSO Liaison, I cannot discern either an organisational indicator or a philosophical shift in ICANN to suggest a sea change in enforcement operations. So this notion of "refining" the RAA to give ICANN more enforcement powers is, at best, a PR exercise which will not likely affect dissolute registrar/registry behaviors in the near or mid term. The end result will be a wash. Carlton Samuels