Bret Fausett wrote:
If we allow organizations that are composed of something other than individuals, I'm not sure I followed where this went off-track.
I'd always thought that ALSs had to be based on NPOs with an explicit, identifiable, membership base. Umbrella orgs -- for instance, national orgs with multiple state or provincial sub-groups -- still can be traceable down to individual members and, as such, are fine with me. Why do things need to get more complex than this?
are you comfortable sharing the NARALO with political action committees, lobbying organizations, "think tanks," and other organizations that are funded and directed by commercial businesses with commercial interests in the outcome of ICANN's decisions? (think Verisign, AT&T, intellectual property interest groups, registrars, etc.).
There are also non-profit think tanks, lobbying orgs and PACs; they also have their own agendas, not universally in the public interest. I'm happy with leaving them all over at the NCUC. :-) Also consider that industry consortia are also "membership" organizations, though their members are corporations not individuals. I think that the existing guidelines, that require an org to have a democratic process and voting individual members represent a reasonable boundary. - Evan PS: I would note that an "intellectual property interest group" comprised of a membership of individual inventors/creators, is (and should continue to be) a legitimate candidate for an ALS. I may not agree with their interests, but they can't be denied entry because of their POV. In Canada there is a growing rift between creators and "rights holders" (ie, publishers and producers); both have an interest in intellectual property issues, but from increasingly divergent viewpoints.