Hello fellow NARALOites, I have heard from a number of our RALO members on the issue of the draft report, but far from everyone and not even a majority. I believe this issue is important, because if accepted as-is the proposed changes will diminish the role of At-Large in ICANN goings-on at a time when this role requires enhancement. All the well-intentioned policy work we can do will be impeded or "consensus-ed" into the ground, with no real clout at the Board level. Those who have spoken on the issue that I have heard from have all been critical, but this is far from a widespread protest. I would like to know whether there is interest in having a NARALO position on the draft report before the Paris meeting. Having this would help guide your representatives there (myself, Darlene, Beau and Robert) on the inevitable discussions on the issue that will take place. Perhaps we may even be able to prod the global ALAC into action of its own. I have no problem writing a initial position to post for endorsement -- but it would reflect my own deep negative reaction which has already been described on this list. My time is very limited, however, and I would prefer not to start this if no interest exists in creating a regional position. If interest does exist, I can draft a brief statement (preferably working with others who would like to help) and see if, with any suggested modifications, it can be accepted by NARALO through consensus by Sunday morning. Is this reasonable? Is a statement desirable? I find it very unnerving that there has been ZERO reaction on the global ALAC list except for Izumi's brief comment. If ALAC is not interested in staking out a membership-based position then I think NARALO needs to step up. What does everyone else think? Feel free to reply privately, if that is appropriate for you, and I can incorporate your comments anonymously. Even if there is no consensus on a region-wide point of view, all input is helpful. - Evan