Evan, Danny, and all, I must broadly agree with your response to Danny below. Yet still I fear and feel strongly that much of what Danny has stated is accurate or largly rings true. I do not believe that Danny is attempting to be disruptive, but is reflecting his frustration in observation to what he reads here and has otherwise experianced. -----Original Message-----

From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Sent: Apr 14, 2008 5:16 PM To: NA Discuss <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] [At-Large] ALAC Draft Accountability Framework andConflicts of Interest Policy

Danny Younger wrote:

...

We are in the middle of the ALAC Review process. The very first determination that the evaluator will need to make is whether the ALAC has a continuing purpose. I am using this list to put forward the argument that the ALAC no longer has a continuing purpose.

You may not like this perspective, but I have a right to express this viewpoint.

I am not for a moment denying your right to express your opinion, and regardless of my views on your conclusions I can appreciate how you got there. You may be surprised at the extent to which I (and I suspect others) may agree with you.

Just the same, you've missed my point completely. I'm not challenging your right to speak but I absolutely question the judgment and tact (or lack thereof) used in choosing this forum.

By definition, those on the ALAC list (and its RALO subsidiaries such as this) are generally involved because we _do_ feel that we're making a difference. Repeatedly telling _this_ audience that At-Large is useless and should be eliminated is both insulting and pointless.

Certainly within ICANN there are places to express and debate your views in such a way they may have influence, most notably -- as you well know -- the ALAC review. I'll be more than happy to challenge or support those views in the appropriate venues, but doing it _here_ is simply destructive and distracting. It's simply disingenuous of you to complain of our lack of effectiveness, while deliberately getting in our way and attempting to distract and demoralize as we try to be effective. Indeed, doing so will prove to be quite counter-productive _especially_ in other regions that are less tolerant of verbal aggression.

Until Plan B materializes, the status quo is what we have to work with. Within this group, I am asking you to help us make the most of what we do have (while working in other channels to improve the situation). Otherwise, get out of the way and at least don't impede our efforts to do what we can -- as I'm sure you're aware, ALAC is already far too easily distracted. I'm really hoping you choose the former.

And I'll be happy to help find a more appropriate place for a public "the future of ICANN public participation" debate. Just not here, please.

- Evan

Regards, Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!) "Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" - Abraham Lincoln "Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt "If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by P: i.e., whether B is less than PL." United States v. Carroll Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] =============================================================== Updated 1/26/04 CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC. ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com My Phone: 214-244-4827