Re: [ga] request for details about ALAC members

[DPF <david@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 09:18:28 -0400 (EDT), Jonathan Weinberg
<weinberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Kristy McKee wrote:
>>[snip]
>> Just in case you were wondering, there is enough information available to
>> convince even the most hopeful person that ICANN's ALAC truly has no
>> interest in working for the purpose of enhancing the Internet for netizens;
>> but rather the special interest groups they represent.
>
>	This is silly.  I am far from "the most hopeful person" when it
>comes to anything ICANN, as folks who have read my writings know.  And
>there's plenty to criticize in the fact that the ALAC members were
>appointed top-down by the ICANN board and nomcomm.  But I'm personally
>familiar with a half-dozen of the ALAC folks, and I can testify that
>they're people of integrity and good will (not to mention a pretty
>sensible approach to substantive DNS issues).  That does *not* mean that
>we should all jump on the ALAC bandwagon (as Michael points out, the group
>is powerless anyway) -- but it means that a blanket personal attack on its
>members is a bad way to go.

I can only agree entirely with Jon's words.  I have found the attacks
on ALAC members appalling.

Despite my distaste for how ALAC is structured, I note that they have
managed to put together several very sensible pro-registant and
pro-user policy statements on topical issues, which is far more than
certain other groups have done.

DPF
--
Blog: http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz
E-mail: david@xxxxxxxxxx
ICQ:    29964527
MSN:    dpf666@xxxxxxxxxxx