Per Milton's request in the note below, I'm copying this to NA-Discuss, since most of the folks who have been having these conversations are in the NA RALO. I have copied also Carlton Samuels of LAC RALO who has also expressed interest in this regard. I don't want to get in the middle of any contretemps between Milton and Danny, here -- not my intent, rather, we should just try to talk about this before Cairo. Milton is right that the whole ALAC should talk about it but I'm not sure forwarding this e-mail to the broad list would be the best approach due to language issues. BB -----Original Message----- From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@syr.edu] Sent: Tuesday, September 30, 2008 5:32 PM To: Carlos Afonso Cc: dannyyounger@yahoo.com; Brendler, Beau; Mark Costa Subject: RE: [Fwd: Re: [Fwd: NCUC Capture Plans]] Danny Can you explain to me how giving all organizations/members the same voting rights in plenum constitutes capture? Do you think you or your group of 4-5 people should get more votes than others? It's also interesting that you didn't initiate discussion within NCUC, since you are on our list. Are you afraid that your accusations won't stand up when people can actually respond to you? I've copied Beau and Mark Costa, they're on the ALAC discuss list and perhaps can forward this response. Can you do that, please? Here's the deal: under the plan we are considering, new constituencies will be relatively easy to form, but once that happens constituencies can no longer be tied to a specific number of seats on the GNSO Council. (Otherwise you will constantly be fighting over the distribution of seats in a zero sum game. One constituency can gain seats only by taking them away from another constituency.) Instead, all members of the Noncommercial Stakeholders Group (NCSG) should have basically the same voting rights and Council members should seek the support of ALL members in ALL constituency groupings. This is really the only sensible way to do it, if you bother to think about it. Another thing you apparently don't understand: in the future NCSG, the NCUC will dissolve; i.e., cease to exist. It's pretty hard for NCUC to "capture" something when it no longer exists. All current members will become generic NCSG members and free to reform as new constituencies under the new structure. Note also that the current NCUC contains a great deal of diversity and cannot be considered a single, homogenous force out to "capture" anything. E.g., we have multilingualists, Chinese ngos, Mormon conservatives alongside atheists and liberal free speech advocates. More details will be available about this plan as we work it out, and we already have plans to discuss it with ALAC and anyone else interested in Cairo. We're open to reasonable ideas, if you have any. But it's not helpful to try to poison the well by knocking a proposal you haven't even seen yet, and haven't even made an effort to discuss with the people developing it. --MM *** Scanned ** This e-mail message is intended only for the designated recipient(s) named above. The information contained in this e-mail and any attachments may be confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not review, retain, copy, redistribute or use this e-mail or any attachment for any purpose, or disclose all or any part of its contents. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and permanently delete this e-mail and any attachments from your computer system.