ICANN Email List Archives
[At-Large Advisory Committee]
RE: [alac] Fwd: Appeal to the ALAC
- To: vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, alac@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: RE: [alac] Fwd: Appeal to the ALAC
- From: "Roberto Gaetano" <alac_liaison@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:58:36 +0000
I think that establishing mailing lists within ALAC, open to public
contribution, is something that we have already discussed in the early days
of ALAC, and the answer was that it was a good idea.
Isn't this what the ALAC forum is for? Personally, I see no problems in
opening a specific topic on this subject.
ICANN BoD Liaison
From: Vittorio Bertola <vb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: ALAC <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [alac] Fwd: Appeal to the ALAC
Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2006 16:54:10 +0100
> Dear Vittorio,
> Please forward this correspondence to the At-Large
> Advisory Committee.
> Dear At-Large Advisory Committee members,
> Vittorio's recent post to CircleID (cited below)
> reflects the frustration of the At-Large. We are a
> community convinced that the ICANN Board has not been
> listening to our input.
> As end-users of the DNS, policy decisions enacted by
> the Board impact us directly and as such we, ICANN's
> largest stakeholder group, warrant seats at the table
> where such decisions are being made -- this is the
> only manner by which we can ensure that our views will
> be taken into account.
> In order to secure representation on the Board we
> members of the At-Large have no choice but to
> establish a Supporting Organization to elect our own
> Board representatives.
> It is long past time to pursue this course of action.
> Every other substantial group within ICANN has such
> representation. Unless you believe that it is
> sufficient for our community to continue being treated
> as a pariah, then I ask you to take action (as did the
> ccTLD community) by laying the groundwork to establish
> our own Supporting Organization.
> Consider your own frustration. Ask yourselves, has an
> advisory body construct well-served the needs of the
> At-Large, or would we better be served by a different
> institutional framework? The ccTLDs recognized that
> their needs weren't being suitably met by ICANN and
> reorganized accordingly. We as an impacted community
> must do the same.
> I ask you to begin by establishing a mailing list
> wherein these and other at-large considerations may be
> thoroughly discussed/debated by the entirety of our
> I ask you to enter into a discussion with your peers
> in the At-Large.
> Best regards,
> Danny Younger
vb. [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<-----
http://bertola.eu.org/ <- Prima o poi...
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!