Re: [alac] Discussions on the current model
I recognize the hard work that committee members have done to recruit the ALS applicants we've had, I just don't see enough results for the At-Large user-base to keep it up without a major rethinking of how ALAC can have impact within ICANN.
At 09:27 PM 11/29/2005 -0300, Sebas Ricciardi wrote: ...
I think it will be constructive, since you've raised this issue, if you could provide us some practical examples of the difficulties you're experiencing. Besides Danny Younger, Richard Henderson and Karl Auerbach, how many organizations have turned you down? Why?
None of EFF, EPIC, ACLU, CDT, or ACM (Electronic Frontier Foundation, Electronic Privacy Information Center, American Civil Lerties Union, Center for Democracy and Technology, Association for Computing Machinery), all organizations that deal with Internet users in areas ICANN's mission touches, have shown any interest in being involved with ALSs. In large part, the ALS-RALO-Advisory Committee path sounds too remote.
Further, it does bother me that of the few who have expressed interest in the U.S. , the current structure doesn't even accommodate them all.
Thanks, I'll look forward to joining the group in Vancouver for further discussions.
-- Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html Chilling Effects: http://www.chillingeffects.org