A quick clarification on my note .. the 15 should read 15%. I also see there is a supplemental document clarifying the answer. It's clear to me that the original "No" was not an accurate answer, and looked like a misunderstanding. On 4/9/07, Michael Maranda <mmaranda@afcn.org> wrote:
I know the process for ALS status is fairly long, but if a candidate clearly does not meet the criteria, a quick rejection is in order - even if the rejection "jumps the queue".
However, I am not clear that the "No" in answer to the question is really saying "No" in a way that would result in rejection. The sentences following the "No" indicate that 15 are not from within the region, and that they have an international focus, but it appears the bulk of it's members are in the region.
I'm more disturbed that there has been no discussion of such a meeting on the NA discussion list, or have I missed something?
-MM
On 4/9/07, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
Michael,
I presume that the report is accurate for the following reasons:
The Yonkers meeting is being partially sponsored by a candidate ALS. There is a candidate ALS based in Yonkers -- Consumer Reports WebWatch -- see http://alac.icann.org/namerica/applications/crw-01mar07.pdf
What is particular disturbing is that this applicant answered "NO" to the question: "Is your organization constituted so that participation by individual Internet users who are citizens or residents of countries within the Geographic Region in which your organization is based will predominate in your organization's operation?"
As a "YES" answer is required by the ICANN Bylaws (Article XI Section 2 #4i), this candidate ALS should not, under any circumstances, be granted an accredited ALS status,
...and to allow a candidate ALS to partially sponsor a meeting when you know that their application should indeed be declined is so very far from ethical that one has to wonder as to the lengths that ICANN Staff will go to try to ram a NARALO down our throats in time for the upcoming San Juan session.
I have no doubt that ICANN will be highly embarrassed by having to decline an application from this significant entity and will direct their Staff to lobby ALAC members to "bend the rules" with respect to this application.
This is no longer about what the North American community wants, this instead is all about getting a final RALO established so that ICANN can say to the U.S. Department of Commerce that ICANN has in place a channel for the voices of the end user community. It's all one big political game. We are just the expendable pawns in this effort.
--- Michael Maranda < mmaranda@afcn.org> wrote:
That is disturbing news. I have supported in principle, a face to face meeting among the NA ALS and ALS applicants, at the proposed meeting in Vancouver at the end of February. That meeting was never approved and did not get support. We went ahead with an informational meeting, and with the exception of staff and Canadian participation, no one else from the US stepped forward to participate.
I'd like to know which groups are convening this meetingand why there has been no discussion on the NA discussion list.
Is this report accurate?
On 4/9/07, Danny Younger < dannyyounger@yahoo.com> wrote:
From the ALAC Chair's Monthly Report:
"NARALO -In conjunction with At Large and Global Partnerships staff, at the request of some NA
ALSes,
requested funding for and got approval for a NARALO formation meeting in Yonkers, NY in early May. This meeting is being partially sponsored by a candidate ALS." https://st.icann.org/alac/index.cgi?april_2007
It would sure be nice to know which North American At-Large Structures requested this otherwise unannounced NARALO formation meeting (and which one is partially funding this meeting). I guess that transparency isn't very high on the ALAC's list.
The meeting date and location would also be nice to know...
As for me, I'd love to know why these particular ALS's won't even discuss their views on NARALO structure and formation on the North American At-Large discussion list (as had been requested prior to the aborted Vancouver formation meeting).
The whole thing smacks of a set-up orchestrated by ICANN Staff in order to promote the fantasy of At-Large involvement.
____________________________________________________________________________________
No need to miss a message. Get email on-the-go with Yahoo! Mail for Mobile. Get started. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mail
_______________________________________________ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
--- Draft MoU with ICANN: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_MOU
Draft Operating Principles: http://www.icannwiki.org/NA_RALO_OP
--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition President, Association For Community Networking
Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance: http://www.digitalaccessalliance.org
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta. http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition President, Association For Community Networking
Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance: http://www.digitalaccessalliance.org
-- --------------------------------------------------------------- Executive Director, CTCNet Chicago Chapter Co-Founder, Chicago Digital Access Alliance Co-Chair, Illinois Community Technology Coalition President, Association For Community Networking Support the efforts of the Chicago Digital Access Alliance: http://www.digitalaccessalliance.org