The definition of an "Unaffiliated user" that appears in the MOU is a bit more recent than the one found in the OP. Following Wendy's suggestions which I thought made sense, I had just this week changed the definition to: Unaffiliated individual - An unaffiliated individual is (for NARALO's purposes) a person subscribed to the NA-Discuss list <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-list s.icann.org> who is not a voting delegate for an ALS and not part of ICANN staff. This new definition would answer Michael's reservations on the definition found in the OP. We now have 2 incompatible definitions that will have to be aligned eventually. Because we are still voting on the OP, I don't think we should change them now. We could possibly adopt some minor changes to the OP when we vote for the MOU shortly. While I understand Michael's concerns, I can also see that some could criticize the fact that allowing ALS members to be considered as unaffiliated members could make it possible for ALSes to take over the unaffiliated users group, _________________________________________ Luc Faubert Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du changement / IT governance and change management consulting +1 514 236 5129 www.LucFaubert.com <http://www.lucfaubert.com/> www.LucFaubert.com/blog www.isoc.qc.ca <http://www.isoc.qc.ca/> www.ccig.ca <http://www.ccig.ca/> www.uqbm.qc.ca <http://www.uqbm.qc.ca/> www.maillons.qc.ca <http://www.maillons.qc.ca/> ________________________________ From: na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:na-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of RJGlass | America@Large Sent: 21 mai 2007 16:02 To: Michael Maranda Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] concern regarding a provision of the draft OP I would guess that there could be situations where you want a mix of both people who are and who are not affilliated with ALSs. Randy Glass A@L On 5/21/07, Michael Maranda <mmaranda@afcn.org> wrote: Currently: 17. The 2 members from among the unaffiliated individuals who serve as representatives to the NARALO General Assembly must meet the following criter * not be a member of a certified ALS, This provision troubles me. I could see myself as a general member of an accredited ALS, where that ALS has a somewhat specific focus or interest, and where I do not feel it represents my full range of interests as an individual. If I am not of the leadership of that organization, and I am dedicated to working within the parameters we have set, it would be a mistake to exclude persons on such basis. As I review the accredited entities I see room for many of us to be involved in each other's organizations. For example, I endorse the work of CAUCE and would consider joining them as a member. My interest there may be general enough that I dont take an active role in the organization beyond supporting their direct mission and educating others on the topic. If I had a range of other views and concerns I wished to raise on ICANN policy, I would prefer the freedom to stand before you as an individual when occasion arises. I am not absolute in my opposition to this provision, I do understand it's intention, but I would appreciate discussion or reconsideration of this point. Regards, Michael Maranda _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists .icann.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct -- ------------------------- AmericaAtLarge.org RJPacific.com DDMF.org