RE: [ga] Call for Statements of Interest -- NA RALO Seats on ALAC

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello Roberto,

The last time that I checked the GA is not an ICANN
sanctioned body.  As you recall, its representative
structure was officially eliminated by ICANN at the
same time that ICANN ignominiously dispensed with
elected at-large directors.  A truly great moment in
ICANN history if you happen to be a fan of bloodless
coups.

Roberto, at one time you respected the value of the GA
as a cross-constituency platform for discussion (you
chaired the body), but now the GA doesn't even figure
in your GNSO Improvements.  

At one time you understood that the At-Large was an
aggregate of unaffiliated individuals; now you
persevere in the farce that non-commercial orgs are
the at-large.

Your ascent to the Board has changed you (in my
opinion, for the worse).  

... but I'll spare you a back-and-forth discussion
about the NARALO (it's not worth it), and let you go
ahead and get ready for the orchestrated photo-op at
the MOU signing that will demonstrate to the world
that ICANN has finally solved "its vexing at-large
problem".

You'll be spending $760,000+ a year for the input from
these pretenders to the at-large mantle... I hope that
their pontifications about Internet Governance will be
worth the expenditure made on their behalf.

Enjoy the rest of your meeting, and let's hope that
you get to work on the "specifications" needed to deal
with the required revisions to the RAA.  That's what
the "real at-large" has been calling for.

all the best,
Danny

--- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Danny,
> 
> Unless I am missing something, this is the election
> by the NA RALO members
> (who are all by definition on the NA RALO list) of
> *their* representative in
> ALAC. Thank you for admitting that is at least *not
> unacceptable* to you to
> even post it to the NA RALO list, you are very
> generous and open minded.
> 
> If somebody from outside the NA RALO would like to
> be elected to the
> position, he/she should, at least, lobby the NA
> RALO, and/or have a
> sufficient number of friends in the NA RALO to get
> elected. Ergo, he/she
> would know anyhow via the friends he/she has. Of
> course, for PR reasons, it
> would be good to publicize this more broadly, I
> agree with you on that.
> Where we disagree, is that it is a *fraud*, as you
> call it, not to do it.
> 
> As a matter of fact, may I have the list of all
> outreach actions the GA has
> taken when planning the election of its officials?
> 
> Best regards,
> Roberto
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Danny Younger
> [mailto:dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx] 
> > Sent: 22 June 2007 22:31
> > To: Roberto Gaetano
> > Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: RE: [ga] Call for Statements of Interest
> -- NA RALO 
> > Seats on ALAC
> > 
> > Roberto,
> > 
> > No one's arguing that it's unacceptable to post
> the notice to 
> > a relevant mailing list.  I contend that the
> requirement for 
> > sufficient outreach has not been met. 
> > The Call for Statements of Interest was not posted
> on the 
> > NARALO website, it was not posted on the ALAC
> website, it was 
> > not posted on the ICANN website; neither was it
> posted on 
> > ICANN's public participation website, nor in the
> ICANN Blog.  
> > It was not in an ICANN newsletter, nor in an ICANN
> news alert 
> > nor in an at-large newsletter.  
> > 
> > Confining the Call only to the tiny handful of
> subscribers to 
> > the NA list is unfair to the broader North
> American At-Large 
> > community.
> > 
> > Perhaps you recall the earlier at-large elections?
> 
> > Sufficient publicity, and 10,632 participating
> North American 
> > members... and what do you have now with your
> pretend 
> > at-large?  Will you even get 32 votes to select a
> North 
> > American representative to the ALAC? 
> > 
> > It's sad to think that you remain comfortable
> perpetrating a fraud.
> > 
> > As Milton Mueller recently stated on the NCUC
> list:
> > 
> > "Originally, the At Large was created to represent
> 
> > unaffiliated individuals. After the "reforms" of
> 2002, when 
> > the At Large membership became the At Large
> Advisory 
> > Committee, the concept of At Large was suddenly
> based on "At 
> > Large Structures" (ALSs). "At large structure" is
> just a 
> > fancy name for a noncommercial organization. The
> combination 
> > of an ALAC based on ALSs and an NCUC based on
> noncommercial 
> > organizations is a source of perpetual confusion
> among civil 
> > society actors who are considering participation
> in ICANN, 
> > and a source of discoordination within ICANN. This
> confusion 
> > is compounded by the fact that many people,
> apparently 
> > including the Board Governance Committee, still
> think that 
> > ALAC represents unaffiliated individuals, which it
> does only 
> > imperfectly because of its reliance on ALSs."
> > 
> > The entire ALAC and RALO concepts remain an insult
> to the 
> > at-large community.  I guess it's no wonder that
> you want to 
> > keep real outreach to the real at-large to a
> minimum... 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --- Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > 
> > > Danny,
> > > Since the seat is for representing NA RALO, I
> find it perfectly 
> > > acceptable to post it in the relevant mailing
> list, i.e. 
> > the NA RALO.
> > > Obviously, participants to the NA RALO mailing
> list, like you, can 
> > > post it to other list as they see fit.
> > > Cheers,
> > > Roberto
> > > 
> > > 
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of
> > > Danny Younger
> > > > Sent: 22 June 2007 16:37
> > > > To: veni markovski; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > Subject: Re: [ga] Call for Statements of
> Interest
> > > -- NA RALO
> > > > Seats on ALAC
> > > > 
> > > > Veni,
> > > > 
> > > > You understand that no outreach was done
> > > whatsoever? 
> > > > Just a Call posted to a single small list? 
> And
> > > you find this
> > > > acceptable?  Shame on you.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > --- veni markovski <veni@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > > Danny,
> > > > > you understand that sometimes the quality is
> not
> > > in the quantity,
> > > > > right?
> > > > > As for that - I believe we have had a
> discussion
> > > about the
> > > > > participation in the At Large process.
> People
> > > can choose to
> > > > be part of
> > > > > this solution, or part of the problem, or
> part
> > > of the landscape.
> > > > > And, as Wendy pointed out, there is no
> problem
> > > for the
> > > > organizations
> > > > > (e.g. ISOC-New York) to be more active at
> the At
> > > Large.
> > > > > So, you could contribute, or continue to try
> to
> > > mock and ruin other
> > > > > people's efforts.
> > > > > 
> > > > > veni
> > > > > 
> > > > > At 09:51 6/22/2007  -0700, Danny Younger
> wrote:
> > > > > >Spotted only on the North American discuss
> list
> > > -- really great
> > > > > >outreach if all you want is a tiny
> > > > > club.
> > > > > >Probably deserves a complaint to the
> > > Ombudsman's office...
> > > > > 
> > > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> 
=== message truncated ===



 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Sucker-punch spam with award-winning protection. 
Try the free Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/features_spam.html