Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP

[Rick Wesson <wessorh@xxxxxx>]

Richard,

On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Richard Henderson wrote:


> ALAC does *not* represent the thousand members of the At Large who continued
> their community, after the Board Room purge. They are represented at
> www.icannatlarge.org  and can also be referenced at www.atlarge.org . Here
> you will locate the official and ongoing work of the real At Large.

www.icannatlarge.org seems to have 1,000 members signed up including me,
though I have never participated in a www.icannatlarge.org discussion nor
been contacted requesting my views on anything by www.icannatlarge.org

so, www.icannatlarge.org does not represnet my view nor have they ever
asked for it. www.atlarge.org is just a couple of pages and though it may
aspouse to represent the internet community has no participation, members,
or lists behind it.


> And they are perfectly ably to represent their own views, and have a
> thousand-fold the number of posts on their mailing list, and operate
> democratically on the basis of one-person-one-vote... *not* top-down
> nominated delegates who present draft statements out of virtually nil
> correspondence.

all your claims are hard to find and still don't justify your view that
www.icannatlarge.org or www.icannatlarge.org represent the views of the
community on anything.

> The real At Large insists on one-person-one-vote.

ok, why. and while you are at it please provide documentation on your
asertion.

> The real At Large insists on the restoration of At Large Board members,
> democratically elected.

I agree, but thats just me, I don't claim to speak for thousands.

> ALAC in democratic terms represents no-one.

nor do any of the above mentioned websites. Insted of standing up and
stating that you, me, or anyone else represents the "at-large" lets work
on building a framework for membership in ICANN. Once established they
can elect a representative that MAY represent the views of the "at-large"

-rick