Hi Dharma,
All the comments that I looked at seem to being working from a framework of belief that staff is usurping civil society. People may never figure out (or care) what ICANN does or how it works, but a story of a snub has a way of snowballing. Once it's out there, it's hard to pull back. At a minimum, I think we (NARALO) should reach out to staff and petitioners to get a handle on what's going on.
This sounds absolutely reasonable.
From my own experience, ICANN staff tends to be as good or bad as the constituents around them. Remember, GNSO support staff also exist to serve the contracted parties and business interests which still have major seats at that particular table. What might look like a snub may have been a vote that didn't go civil society's way or some other political loss -- that constituency does not have anywhere near a balance of power within GNSO. In this particular respect At-Large has an easier path to the top of the ICANN food chain; we just haven't been very effective in exploiting the tools available to us. Keep in mind that the business interests and contracted parties are very motivated and better organized. If we go into policy debate unprepared, too late or in too-small numbers we lose.
We need people, we need participants. One doesn't need to be an expert in all things ICANN to monitor a specific issue or committee and help us mobilize before it's too late (ie, putting out a paniced call to arms on deadline day). The field is diverse enough such that single-issue specialists still have plenty to do. I can't speak for GNSO but I do not believe that ALAC is being usurped by its staff -- certainly not by the staff assigned to us. That's not to say that all of ICANN staff are supportive of At-Large; I can identify a few -- some very high up -- who are downright contemptuous of our very presence. But there have been some welcome surprises as well; CFO Kevin Wilson clearly "gets" us. As At-Large matures and produces more policy, I expect the trend to shift further. The signs about ICANN's new CEO are promising, but we need to be vigilant that the reality matches the promise. Generally these days when there is problem with staff (IMO) it usually comes from staff filling vacuums that At-Large people should have filled in the first place. Dharma, are you interested in helping create a strategy that turns the dissatisfaction you see into an outreach opportunity, one that could increase At-Large's ability to respond to the problems that are being identified? Do you have anything particular in mind? - Evan