I've just posted my comments to Wendy's earlier email. My biggest concern is that the dual chamber approach adds a possible level of duplication and bureaucracy . In essence is tries to borrow from a dual chamber representation model and implant it in the the NA RALO . It has complexities that need to be detailed before we can overall endorse the idea . it is worth discussing - more than that, we should try to see how the idea would in fact work. If it is workable,and possible solution - we should try to implement it. that being said, I think it is a complex a structure one that will require a positive collaboration among all those involved in this discussion. Questions and replies should be worded in a constructive fashion, without disrespect. Robert --- Robert Guerra <rguerra@privaterra.org> Managing Director, Privaterra Tel +1 416 893 0377 On 29-May-07, at 8:52 AM, Thompson, Darlene wrote:
I'm not sure that I am getting what Wendy is saying exactly right but if what she is suggesting is that the non-affiliated users have equal voting as all of the ALSs combined, then I would NEVER agree to that.
I think what she proposes is a bit more complex. If I am assuming correctly, ALS would be represented both in the upper chamber as well as the lower one. A bit of duplication - that's for sure.
What Jean was outlining seems much more reasonable. Basically, an umbrella ALS for unaffiliated users that can make up its own rules (or lack thereof) for entry and have two votes along-side the other ALSs. This could actually encourage more ALS formation as individuals might clump together along the lines of common interest groups and form their own ALSs in time.
Wendy's more elaborate structure can be made to work, however more specific examples on its functioning as well as how to implement it in the documents is needed A virtual ALS for unaffiliated users, is in my opinion, the easiest structure to implement at the moment. regards Robert