ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Letter to the ALAC

  • To: richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx, ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Letter to the ALAC
  • From: "Roberto Gaetano" <ploki_xyz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2005 18:29:32 +0000
  • In-reply-to: <002101c4f6c1$82d78560$142cfd3e@richard>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Richard Henderson wrote:

To entrust the At Large movement to ALAC is to accede to ICANN's agenda... namely, to pay lipservice to individual users but in effect to lock them out. Otherwise, why not just revert to accepting At Large membership on an individual basis (with no mandatory 15 days attendance at ICANN meetings as a prerequisite of membership!).



Happy new year to everybody.

Richard,
there is a misunderstanding. When ALAC was discussing participation to ICANN meetings, and I added that I thought it was important, I was not speaking of participating individuals, but of the (elected or nominated) ALAC representatives.
The misunderstanding probably comes from the fact that I improperly named them "members". In the flow of the thread, it was clear (at least to the people who posted), but I agree, in retrospective, that cutting the sentences it could give a wrong message.
Seen in this context, I think you would agree that, even if individual members will have rarely the chance to attend an ICANN meeting in person, it is of the paramount importance that the 15 ALAC representatives have the time to dedicate to this task, i.e. roughly 15 days per year, as you rightly calculated.
Regards,
Roberto






<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>