RE: [ga] ALAC Review

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

I just love how proponents of a bad idea, turn around and suggest failure is caused by proponents of a good idea. Good men and women did not support this. It was an effort to diffuse input by the common man. Even in this discussion dotconmoners are left out as though it is already upheld that only commercial domain name holders should have input.
I for one question the truth and cornerstone of your thought process. 
My son now travels from Cabo San Lucas to parts unknown in a developing nation into less developing nations, his basic contact with family is the Internet through Internet Cafe's. Is he or the orhanages in Central - South America less worthy of a vote?
I find your arrogance in not allowing a vote to the people astounding.
The average consumer that adds up to the trillion dollar internet economy is not represented.
And you call yourselves men, I doubt it.
\
e

Roberto Gaetano <ploki_xyz@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Danny,

First of all, you are right, an independent review has to be scheduled, it 
is incumbent on the Board to define the calendar.
As for the timing, my personal opinion is that, although the ALAC has been 
formally created in Dec. 2002, it has become operational only at the 
Montreal meeting, June 2003.
However, ALAC is not just waiting for the external assessment: we are 
ourselves not completely happy about the results so far, and we have started 
a few weeks ago a self-assessment process, whose purpose is to identify the 
most urgent actions to be taken.
Personally, I am looking forward to the Vancouver public meeting: 
traditionally, the meetings in NA have been better attended than the average 
by internet users and domain name holders, and therefore I would expect a 
lively discussion, with a lot of constructive criticism.
I am still of the opinion that the GA could, possibly under your guide, or 
the guide of whoever it would elect, play a role, for instance as ALS in 
North America. I regret that the direction taken is a different one, because 
this will (IMHO) end up in delaying further the possibility of making the 
voice of the users stronger. However, I know we have different opinions on 
that, and I fully respect yours.

Best regards, and I hope to see you in large numbers in Vancouver.
Roberto


>From: Danny Younger 
>To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>CC: vinton.g.cerf@xxxxxxx, committee@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: [ga] ALAC Review
>Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2005 09:07:17 -0700 (PDT)
>
>Dear Vint, members of the Board, and members of the ALAC:
>
>A reminder -- The At-Large Advisory Committee was formally created by way 
>of the 15 December 2002 Bylaws.
>
>The current bylaws state:
>
>The Board shall cause a periodic review, if feasible no less frequently 
>than every three years, of the performance and operation of each Supporting 
>Organization, each Supporting Organization Council, each Advisory Committee 
>(other than the Governmental Advisory Committee), and the Nominating 
>Committee by an entity or entities independent of the organization under 
>review.
>
>An independent entity review of the ALAC should be scheduled some time 
>soon.
>
>Best regards,
>Danny Younger
>
>__________________________________________________
>Do You Yahoo!?
>Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
>http://mail.yahoo.com



__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com