Re: [ga] More ALAC Follies

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

The truth is that the individual users who were actively engaged in ICANN
affairs and participated in discussions have largely given up, because they
never asked for ALAC in the first place.

ALAC was a "top down" invention of the ICANN staff and Board, and it was
imposed by Denise Michel and Esther Dyson upon a constituency that never
really wanted it.

The purpose was to distance individuals from the ICANN process, and
consequently individual users were blocked from becoming members.

No wonder the grassroots At Large never wanted ALAC.

A poll was carried out among over a thousand individual users from the
legacy At Large in early 2003. They were given a choice of 295 people to
develop an At Large structure, and asked who they would or would not trust
to represent At Large interests. It was revealing that Denise Michel polled
290th out of the 295, and Esther Dyson polled 293rd out of the 295.

Does this give some impression of the grassroots disdain for the "Esther and
Denise Show" ? Even back then, people simply didn't want this charade and
completely rejected its main architects.

When asked if they supported the ICANN RALO approach, only 16% said they did
(and this may have been ICANN insiders). 69% were opposed. A remaining 15%
were undecided.

When you consider that this Poll was carried out by the largest
one-member-one-vote At Large group at the time, the very constituency Denise
and Esther purported to represent with the launch of their ALAC scheme, it
is clear that ALAC was never what actual individuals wanted. It was foisted
upon the community to legitimise and consolidate Stuart Lynn's "coup" with
its expulsion of our democratically elected representatives.

290th out of 295 people in the "Trust" poll: that highlights exactly how
little the real At Large actually wanted Denise Michel and her ALAC.

Since then ALAC has failed to attract the thousands of people who *might*
have been participating by now. Instead, deprived of personal membership or
representation, most of these individuals have walked away. The ALAC forum
is moribund, a 'graveyard'.

The ALAC charade simply stifles the development of a real At Large which, of
course, would be based on membership of individuals.

ICANN is like a black hole, which sucks people into its methodology.

ALAC is a "mock" At Large, largely dealing with non-democratic
organisations, and completely rejecting the concept of a membership of equal
individuals.

Yrs,

Richard Henderson
www.atlarge.org

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Danny Younger" <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: <aizu@xxxxxxx>; <alac_liaison@xxxxxxxxxxx>; <alac@xxxxxxxxx>;
<ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2005 9:29 PM
Subject: Re: [alac] RE: [alac-admin] Re: [ga] More ALAC Follies


> Vittorio,
>
> The GA once had a representative structure.  There
> used to be elected at-large representatives on the
> Board.  All that we have now is your dysfunctional
> group that remains an impediment to attaining the
> representation that every other entity within ICANN
> enjoys.
>
> You are not performing a service for the at-large,
> rather the ALAC's very existence constitutes an
> ongoing disservice to the at-large.