Alan, I look at the other examples around us in order to evaluate the "effectiveness" of correspondence. The GAC sents a thoughtful Statement to the ICANN board and receives a 24-page response from the ICANN Chairman of the Board. What type of response do ALAC Statements usually obtain? At least with regard to the GAC Statements the ICANN Board knows that the documents submitted are the result of a community-wide process that leads up to a consensus formulation. Draft documents are evaluated at the local level, there is discussion on language revisions held at a working group level and those revisions are typically brought to the full membership for final ratification during a plenary. Contrast that process to what usually happens in the ALAC world where there is almost never any awareness of proposed ALAC statements at the ALS level, where proposed ALAC Statements are never discussed at the RALO level, and where discussion regarding these Statements is almost never present on the ALAC's own discussion list. The makeshift approach used by the ALAC to promulgate Statements has to be replaced -- it has outlived any usefulness that it might once have had.