Karl we have specifically discussed this and taken the advice of ICANN Legal Council and the SIC so we (At-Large) are proceeding in a manner that will allow us to meet our planned time table and the recent resolution of the Board... so again as happens from time to time this is one of those points where we will just have to "agree to Disagree" with each other... Cheryl Langdon-Orr (CLO) On 23 July 2010 19:14, Karl Auerbach <karl@cavebear.com> wrote:

On 07/22/2010 06:34 PM, Cheryl Langdon-Orr wrote:

...

Hi Karl and list, inserted below is (part) of an email I sent on this matter to the NARALO list from a question raised by Avri on the matter of approved processes... I trust these links will assist you re background on this...

All of the materials are "draft" of "preliminary". Indeed even a proposed bylaw amendment is still open for comment.

One usually discovers that it is unwise to pour concrete before the architectural design is established.

In other words it is premature to start gathering names.

In addition the proposed methods are in conflict with our recommendations in the board-level review of the at-large that the process for the public to chose its ICANN director(s) reach far beyond the bounds of the ALAC to encompass potentially any interested person affected by the internet whether or not that person chooses to participate in any ALAC body or sub-body.

As it stands it appears that what is being created is a YANC - Yet Another Nominating Committee. In which case an appropriate question would be "why bother?"

Which brings to mind MacBeth's metaphor upon hearing of the death of his wife: have all of our years of effort to give the community of internet users a real voice within ICANN come to be nothing more than "a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"?

--karl--