Luc Faubert wrote:
"The Chair could be responsible to determine which ALSes made contributions that are "worthwhile".
Absolutely opposed, to anything requiring a judgement call. I am accountable to my group's membership for the quality of our participation -- not to ICANN, and certainly not to this sub-group that -- so far -- can't demonstrate competence at even determining a meeting site (a month before the meeting is supposed to take place!). Am I the only one to see the irony of a group whose participants complain about the arbitrariness of ICANN staff power, yet have no problem assigning similarly arbitrary authority to the group itself? Two wrongs do NOT make a right. Quanitify what you consider "worthwhile" or leave such a provision out. If you can't quanitify it, I can't trust it. - Evan