Re: [ga] Who speaks for the ALAC?

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Wed, 28 May 2003 DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> Having read the "ALAC responses to comments received on the proposed 
> criteria, process and guidelines", I have only question:  Was ICANN Staff member 
> Denise Michel the author of all of these responses?
> 
> http://alac.icann.org/correspondence/responses-21may03.htm

I agree that the answers are more than wimpy.

For example, the answer to L. Gallegos, in my reading, amounts to a
statement that the ALAC, in its paternalistic way, knows best how people
should talk to one another and that it's either the ALAC way or the
highway.

And when I suggested that the ALAC impose no requirement on at-large
members unless equivalent requirements are imposed on members of the SO's,
the ALAC said (paraphrase) "We can't control the SOs".  That's not an
answer, it is an excuse.  The ALAC could have said "We will advocate that
position to the Board" and in the meantime "we will not impose any
requirement that is not imposed on SO's".

The old IDNO and other nascent assemblies in ICANN were dismissed as being
non-representative because they could not demonstrate thousands and
thousands of active, unified members.  I'd suggest that the ALAC's failure
to garner more than a trivial number of comments (even after extending the
period for such comments) is indicative that if those other assemblies
were in fact disconnected from "the public" that the ALAC is even further
disconnected and isolated.

The ALAC lacks the gumption to do what is right; rather it seems intent on
doing what is convenient.

		--karl--




--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html