ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives


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

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

  • To: "Rick Wesson" <wessorh@xxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP
  • From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 18:56:13 +0100
  • Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxx>
  • References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0308281134090.21518-100000@flash.ar.com>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


I am astonished at your comment, because www.icannatlarge.org is effectively
the "Legacy" At Large which mobilised when the At Large Board members were
told they would be expelled by ICANN (who didn't like their independent

You yourself joined this 'continuing' At Large as you have said.

Since then, we have had three public elections, and 99% or more of the
membership were contacted and involved in those elections, and you seem to
have been omitted. (I am astonished but there has to be some reason, and if
you have been so out of touch I can only assume your e-mail has been changed
or mislaid).

The simple facts of the matter are that IcannatLarge has continued to
operate throughout with openness (all Mailing Lists including thousands upon
thousands of e-mails are archived and accessible to the public online) and
with direct communication to members of all important events such as
elections, using our 'Announce' list. This is not myth. It's the simple
truth Rick.

Compare and contrast... ALAC ...

About a dozen or twenty e-mails posted... almost complete non-participation
by the mass of the At Large... as you would expect when something is just
being orchestrated by the Board on the pretence of legitimacy.

I have read many posts by you Rick and have respected many of them.

However I assure you that you are mistaken on this one. You seem to turn
reality on its head.

It is the continuing At Large, not ALAC, which finds itself with the active
mailing lists (all visible and ongoing).

It is the continuing At Large, not ALAC, which democratically elects its

It is the continuing At Large, not ALAC, which springs from the initiatives
of ordinary individuals, bottom up, not top down.

It is the continuing At Large, not ALAC, which seems to attract the
participation of larger numbers of people.

You refer to my webpages at www.AtLarge.org

These are just forwarding pages to the real At Large, although there is a
good possibility/probability that IcannatLarge will change its name to
simply the At Large - which is what we have always been.

Of course, there is a multiplicity of interests involved in Internet
Governance (including Registrars!)...

But I think you are mistaken to suggest that the real and continuing At
Large, with its very active constituency, fails to contact people (simply
not the case) or disregards people's views (there are ongoing debates and
discussions all the time, which you like any other member can engage in... I
hope you do).

But just because you have "never participated" in IcannAtLarge (real At
Large) does not mean that all the thousands (tens of thousands) of other
contributions are to be disregarded.

ALAC is basically the Denise Michel show, and poor Denise has a hell of a
job trying to rope in a handful of others, but that's what the Board has
hired her and paid her to do.

ALAC is simply a top-down Boardroom exercise in damage limitation, imposed
with its pre-ordained structures, and almost wholly ignored by individuals.

Let me put this simple question to you:

Icann At Large e-mail postings: 8,000 to 10,000 (archived)
ALAC e-mail postings: 20 or 30?

Which is the one which is really engaging individuals?

Isn't ALAC just a handful of organisations being manipulated to cover up for
ICANN's expulsion of the At Large from the Board. You admit that was hard to
justify. Well then, look a the motives of the Board, look at the unwanted
product they have created. Its all a continuum.

Sorry, but the At Large does not reside at ALAC.


Richard Henderson

----- Original Message -----
From: Rick Wesson <wessorh@xxxxxx>
To: Richard Henderson <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2003 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP

> Richard,
> On Thu, 28 Aug 2003, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > ALAC does *not* represent the thousand members of the At Large who
> > their community, after the Board Room purge. They are represented at
> > www.icannatlarge.org  and can also be referenced at www.atlarge.org .
> > 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

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