Re: [ga] Making ALAC impossible for ordinary users to join

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

At 09:24 a.m. 9/01/2005, Sotiris wrote:


> Richard Henderson wrote:
> <snip>
> > The proposals being posted by Vittorio are, in my opinion, a further 
> > wrong turning. By making new membership to ALAC even more difficult now 
> > than it was originally... by making 15 days physical attendance at ICANN 
> > meetings around the world a mandatory requirement for membership of 
> > ALAC... these unelected "spokespeople" for the At Large are in effect 
> > perpetuating the "locking out" of so many people who might otherwise 
> > contribute to any remaining 'authority' ICANN tries to claim for 
> > retaining the role it plays.
>
> Which is probably why all the ALAC "structures" to-date are organizations 
> run by the selfsame ALAC Committee members... you see, Vittorio's (as well 
> as the rest of the Committee's) travel costs are paid by ICANN, to the 
> tune of $2500 USD per Committee member per meeting.

Even if  Vittorio and Thomas'  direct out-of-pocket costs are met, they are 
still volunteering all their  time for free.

For both transparency's and fairnesss' sake I would favour the ALAC 
players  to be salaried by ICANN for their time as well,
(although as an icanntax payer I would keep insisting to have my 
representatives on the Board to have a say in the budget.)


Perhaps the appointment of former ccTLD-rebel and at-large supporter Peter 
Dengate-Thrush on the ICANN Board will bring us changing times in this respect.
He knows the cost involved with ICANN-volunteering.

(Please respond Peter, if you are still reading this list!)

If ICANN accepts an At Large representational structure, it will not only 
have to make the political decision, but will have to budget for it as well.

The times of having self-financed gentlemen-volunteers in Parliaments are 
long past.

--Joop--

www.icannatlarge.com