Hi Danny Their purported representatives are the members of the ALSes. That includes you. So if it is a big issue in the North American user community, why not start something instead of bemoaning the fact that others are not doing anything? You are knowledgeable on and passionate about this issue, so - you start, and people who are interested will join you. I promise I will provide support to you in this endeavour. Earlier today I suggested that the people interested in forming a working group or requesting an issues report get together and start the process towards doing that. Some other regions are not that interested in the failure of a US registrar, based on the discussions I have seen. I have seen a lot of discussion in my region recently about other issues, like ccTLDs and IDNs. A lot of people in the LAC region use ccTLDs and there are other issues that interest them when they talk about registrars. I think that you should focus on issues that are important to your region - you can send info on issues to other regions, but hey - if it isn’t that important to them, an they don't respond, why abuse them because they aren't excited about the same things that are important to you? Diversity is interesting. Life would be sooo boring if we were all only interested in the same things. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2007 9:18 PM To: Vittorio Bertola Cc: NA Discuss Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Will the Real At-Large Please Stand Up Vittorio, Sorry, but I don't see a single RALO engaged in discussions pertaining to policy changes that would better protect registrants in the wake of the RegisterFly mess. I've already proposed that what we need is a policy to govern transfers between registrants at a single registrar so that registrants may invoke a dispute resolution procedure in the event that a registrar replaces a registrant's contact details with that of the registrar (an issue that has come up repeatedly in RegisterFly-related comments). Unfortunately, North American At-Large members would rather be debating the nuances of geographical representation within a RALO instead of acting to put into place a plan to deal with legitimate registrant issues. Once more "structure-building" is taking precedence over real action that could assist the registrant community. I've seen this phenomenon in the IDNO, in ICANNATLARGE, and now in the RALOs... so I'm not surprised... it's a nice way for ICANN to keep the At-Large distracted in their own little sandbox. Too bad that the registrants have to continue to suffer while their purported representatives are busy playing the Internet Governance game. ____________________________________________________________________________ ________ TV dinner still cooling? Check out "Tonight's Picks" on Yahoo! TV. http://tv.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica nn.org --- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP Draft Code of Conduct: http://www.icannwiki.org/NARALO_Code_of_Conduct No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.5/812 - Release Date: 5/19/2007 1:52 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.5/812 - Release Date: 5/19/2007 1:52 PM