ICANN ICANN Email List Archives

[At-Large Advisory Committee]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [alac] Selecting Our Successors

  • To: "John L" <johnl@xxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [alac] Selecting Our Successors
  • From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 00:36:10 -0500

At 11:58 PM 1/25/2006, John L wrote:
Interesting, but when you take away even the modicum of direct control that people might appear to have, what's the point?

To me, the point is that voting would be a sham.

Little disagreement there, yet it seems further that an ALS without a vote is pointless. So we're back to "what purpose is there for a group to participate in this pyramid-like scheme?" and perhaps a proof by absurdity that it needs reform.


I recently sent in ALS applications for CAUCE and CAUCE Canada which together have upwards of 15,000 members, which I believe is far more than all of the other NA ALS put together. So if we're "voting" weighted by membership, I always win. Or if each ALS gets one vote, no problem, if I cared I could easily round up a dozen or so and stuff the ballot box.

Bret's suggestion leaves the control with the ALSes if they can agree, which they will if they're smart. Otherwise the nomcom, which has been one of the more functional bits of ICANN, gets to referee.

John Levine, johnl@xxxxxxxx, Primary Perpetrator of "The Internet for Dummies",
Information Superhighwayman wanna-be, http://iecc.com/johnl, Mayor
"I dropped the toothpaste", said Tom, crestfallenly.

Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy