Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP
- To: Roberto Gaetano <ploki_xyz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP
- From: Rick Wesson <wessorh@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 01:53:20 -0700 (PDT)
- Cc: <ga@xxxxxxxx>
- In-reply-to: <Law15-F16ufL0xJdQdS00010f27@hotmail.com>
- Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
comments in line...
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003, Roberto Gaetano wrote:
> Rick Wesson wrote:
> >where is the charter for the ALAC? (see ) Why is the ALAC making
> >recomendations that are not within the scope of the group? It appears that
> >the ALAC is using its position as a "soap box" so its participiants can
> >speak on issues of personal concern.
> > a. The role of the At-Large Advisory Committee ("ALAC") shall be to
> > consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as
> > they relate to the interests of individual Internet users.
i'm sorry, but, you have missed my point. let me back up.
i would like to see the ALAC/ga develop a mission statement for the
At-Large. IMHO, the value of the ALAC is in "nation building" not drilling
If the ALAC could stand up and say "we have a consensus in the @Large on
X" then I *might* take the straw man more seriously, but with out the
process behind the people the document is just the ideas of a few folks.
no matter the intent, effort, discourse or banter without the "individual
Internet users" fully represented in the document, even if amended by
individual comment, it will not reflect the will of the members of the
This is why I am advocating ALAC develop a "Mission Statement" for
the @Large instead of commenting on new TLDs. To build consensus on what
the @large is and develop its spirit/character in a communicatable manner
is of wild benefit.
please understand this note does not comment on, or reflect on the content
of your "straw man" document but on the priorities of the ALAC.