Ok So that's that unless the NCUC changes its charter... it's either/or. Jacqueline -----Original Message----- From: Danny Younger [mailto:dannyyounger@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2007 10:18 AM To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Luc Faubert'; 'Alan Greenberg' Cc: 'At-Large Worldwide'; 'NA Discuss' Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application Hi Roberto, If Communautique (as an org of orgs) will not meet the ALS criteria per the ICANN bylaws, then why leave them out in the cold? It would certainly be better to suggest to them that they can possibly find a home in the NCUC. With regard to "nothing prevents both things to happen at the same time", that may not be true. In fact, I am currently in discussions with Milton Mueller over this issue as the NCUC Charter deems ineligible those organizations that provide services under MoU with ICANN. --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@icann.org> wrote:
Because, as noted half a million times already, the NCUC is a constituency of the GNSO, while the ALAC is an Advisory Committee of the Board, and they have two distinct roles. Therefore, it would be up to the organization itself to decide whether they want to have a (voting) position, limited to GNSO matters, or a (advisory, non voting) position, related to the whole spectrum of ICANN activities. Of course, nothing prevents both things to happen at the same time.
Incidentally, may I note that, to the best of my knowledge, nobody ever went to the NCUC list to suggest that current members of that constituency move *instead* to ALAC, even if most of them would indeed qualify.
Feel free to forward to NA discuss.
Cheers, Roberto
-----Original Message----- From: alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org [mailto:alac-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On Behalf Of Danny Younger Sent: 22 May 2007 15:21 To: Luc Faubert; Alan Greenberg Cc: At-Large Worldwide; NA Discuss Subject: Re: [At-Large] [NA-Discuss] Reason for NO vote for TelecommunitiesCanada's ALS application
So why not do the right thing and refer them instead to the Non-Commercial Users Constituency (NCUC)?
--- Luc Faubert <LFaubert@conceptum.ca> wrote:
Alan,
Thanks for you thorough reply. I appreciate.
From what I understand of the history behind the wording to the effect that orgs certified as ALSes should be user-driven, it was meant as a protection against lobbying groups. It would be a shame if this kept legitimate orgs of orgs out of the process, as these are sometimes the only orgs with the human resources to invest in the demanding task of following ICANN-related activites.
Let's hope ALAC can clear things up before long, as another org of orgs from Canada has applied for certification (Communautique, an org a bit like TC in French-speaking Québec).
Regards,
_________________________________________ Luc Faubert Conseiller en gouvernance TI et en gestion du changement / IT governance and change management consulting +1 514 236 5129 www.LucFaubert.com www.LucFaubert.com/blog www.isoc.qc.ca www.ccig.ca www.uqbm.qc.ca www.maillons.qc.ca
______________________________________________________________
______________________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367
_______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-l
ists.icann.org
At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org
____________________________________________________________________________ ________ Food fight? Enjoy some healthy debate in the Yahoo! Answers Food & Drink Q&A. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545367 _______________________________________________ ALAC mailing list ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org At-Large Official Site: http://www.alac.icann.org ALAC Independent: http://www.icannalac.org No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.467 / Virus Database: 269.7.6/814 - Release Date: 5/21/2007 2:01 PM