On 13 August 2010 00:56, Antony Van Couvering <avc@avc.vc> wrote:
I had no idea that the other ALOs didn't allow individual representation at all... pretty shocking.
In fairness, the original ICANN At-Large infrastructure model proposed to the regions did not accommodate individual participants; NARALO invented it.
I'm not sure why we can't go all the way in the right direction instead of taking steps, but I suppose I should be thankful that we're heading up the right path at least.
We can't dictate what others are doing and IMO need to be careful about evangelising -- North Americans are already seen as over-influential within ICANN -- though I believe that EURALO is planning to follow this path and has been studying our model. NARALO meetings operate in a manner that encourages *all* voices to be part of the consensus building process. That means that whether as a official representative of an ALS, a regular member of an ALS or an unaffiliated member, if you want to participate in NARALO your voice counts in our decision-making process. Participants' views are judged on quality, not where they come from. Any perceived ignoring of viewpoints is unintentional and is addressed immediately upon exposure. I would also note that two of the three current North American representatives on ALAC are unaffiliated with any ALS, and that the first ALAC liaison to the ICANN Board was a NARALO unaffiliated member. So I would label as preposterous the assertion that unaffiliated members within NARALO are disenfranchised compared to members of ALSs. - Evan