I would agree to that.

 

 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Luc Faubert wrote:

> 16. When an ALS does not vote in

3 consecutive NARALO elections, or does

> not contribute a comment on ICANN policy (either directly to

ICANN or

> through collaboration towards a common NARALO comment) in 12

consecutive

> months, a vote of not less than 70% of the North American

At-Large

> Structures then accredited will rescind its member status within

the

> NARALO. The Chair will then submit to ALAC a request for

> de-certification of that ALS.

>

> I hope this captures the wishes of all.
Sorry, Luc, it does not.

I explicitly request the removal of the phrase "either directly to
ICANN or" and removal of the brackets.

Is a body wants to bypass NARALO and go directly to ICANN that is its
prerogative. However, such a body has no business in NARALO if it
contributes nothing; its direct submissions do nothing to benefit the
collaborative elements that are the RALO's reason for being.

As far as the NARALO itself is concerned, a North American based ALS
that does everything directly with ICANN is of no more benefit than an
ALS that drops out of sight. The RALO process was designed to assist
smaller, multi-purpose ALSs to participate, and that means shared
ideas between newcomers and old-timers, between big and small. Orgs
that shun this process should not be rewarded for such selfishness by
being able to claim they're part of a collaborative process. Of
course, this begs the question of why a group that consistently
bypasses the RALO would want to be associated with it in the first place.)

- - Evan

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGJkWBB6WWYxnsgmwRAoFwAJ9EtH9yDV4SbzicdWkMuIznu+gLNgCfZRTx
1uA0b+80fVYl54skMrvR+K4=
=BN2i
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----