[alac] Re: More ALAC Follies

[Izumi AIZU <aizu@xxxxxxx>]

Danny,

I don' agree with you criticism to ALAC 100%, but I see some
of your points valid.

This may not be the majority of ALAC's opinion,
but I think ALAC is spending too long time to form
RALO and ALAC with the current structure.

I see existing ALSs are not as actively engaged as we want them
to be.

Thus I think there is a room for major change for ALAC structure,
and activities, but that does not mean denying all of ALAC works so far.

I think we tried pretty hard to achieve the objectives given,
with some success and some failure. But denying it totally
does not seem constructive for strengthening the individual
user participation to ICANN process, if you look at the
global scope.

Dissolution of ALAC per se seems not to be a viable option
at this point.

izumi


At 13:29 05/11/27 -0800, Danny Younger wrote:
> Vittorio,
>
> With all due respect, while it is true that many
> long-time GA participants are given to feisty
> verbalizations, it is also true that they are the true
> participants in the ICANN process.  Unlike your
> certified structures, we "individuals" actually
> provide forthright discussion/commentary and interact
> regularly with members of the ICANN Board.
>
> >From day one we have argued that our key concern is
> not "participation" (as we all vigorously
> participate), but rather "representation".  You
> haven't listened.
>
> Your ALAC remains a barrier to the realization of such
> representation for individuals as there are still
> those on the Board that would prefer to give your
> group, the ALAC, even more time to solve its myriad
> problems rather than having to face the prospect of a
> group of individuals in their midst clamouring for
> representational rights.
>
> You can help us achieve this goal of representation by
> folding up the ALAC tent.
>
> 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.
>
> Please remember your roots.  You used to respect
> consensus.  If you polled everyone that was formerly
> on the icannatlarge mailing list, or the GA list, the
> consensus conclusion would call for shutting down the
> ALAC immediately as an irredeemable and horribly
> failed experiment.
>
> You've had your chance.  Move on.  Recommend the
> dissolution of the ALAC.
>
> Best wishes,
> Danny
>
>
>
> --- Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ha scritto:
> > > Vittorio Bertola wrote:
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > >>we do not grant exclusives to our
> > >>applicants, we just verify whether they meet some
> > basic criteria.
> > >
> > >
> > > What criteria?!  As Richard Henderson pointed, out
> > most of your approved
> > > alac 'structures' don't even have a web site, and
> > those few who do have NO
> > > web based mechanisms for user
> > interaction/input/discussion!
> > >
> > > Give it up Vittorio!  The sham is now patently
> > clear to everyone.  You and
> > > your alac DO NOT represent dns users in any way
> > shape or form; you
> > > represent yourselves and you're simply another
> > group of snouts feeding at
> > > the ICANN trough as Abel Wisman pointed out...
> > Shame on you (but you
> > > probably have no concept of shame anyway).
> >
> > Sorry, you and some other long-time GA participants
> > seem to have a very
> > strange concept of dialogue. I am more than happy to
> > discuss successes
> > and failures of the ALAC model both publicly and
> > privately - in fact,
> > this is one of the major items on our Vancouver
> > agenda - but only on the
> > basis of reciprocal respect.
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > vb.             [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a]
> > bertola.eu.org]<-----
> > http://bertola.eu.org/  <- Prima o poi...
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs. Try it free.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/