(Fwd) [ga] On the ALAC's Request for Comments

["L. Gallegos" <jandl@xxxxxxxxx>]

Aside from a few explatives used, I must agree with Danny's assessment of 
the proposed plan.  Further, if this is to be the position of ICANN 
regarding the ALAC, then there is still no credibility and no consensus in 
the community - none.

As long as the public is exlcuded from meaningful participation in the 
election of directors, full membership and all rights thereof, the ALAC is 
meaningless.

Leah Gallegos

------- Forwarded message follows -------
This moronic plan surely must have been conceived by the feeble-minded
idiots and stooges that participated as members of the At-Large Assistance
Group -- it has all the hallmarks of a document hand-written by ICANN 
staff
and rubber-stamped by the ICANN Board's hand-picked puppets (who 
apparently
are too ignorant or too naive to understand that they are only being used
as a conveniently pliable tool to promote the fiction that ICANN is in
compliance with task number nine under the Memorandum of Understanding 
with
the U.S. Department of Commerce).

Having witnessed the complete and total elimination of all public 
representation on the ICANN Board these fools on the At-Large Advisory
Committee now expect the Internet community to rally around a top-down
effort designed to asininely further complicate communication between
individual users and members of the ICANN Board.  

In the past, any individual user could write a letter to ICANN and feel
confident that they would be ignored (as it has become rather apparent 
that
ICANN only bothers to pay attention to those special-interest groups it
deems to be "stakeholders" in its Cartel).  Now one has to do all of the
following in order to achieve the same outcome:

1.  First one must find a noncommercial entity to join.
2.  Next, one needs to convince the members of this non-profit group that
they must post on their website information that pertains to ICANN
activities/issues, and further convince them to offer Internet-based
discussion mechanisms so that such activities/issues may be evaluated. 3. 
Then it next becomes necessary to convince this noncommercial group that
they must provide information on the group's general funding sources to 
the
ALAC (so that this Committee of pseudo-accountants/analysts can ostensibly
come to a determination as to whether the non-profit has commitments or
obligations that would conflict with its ability to involve and represent
individual constituents' interests). 4.  At this point, one must now
confirm that somewhere on the non-profit group's website is an 
articulation
of its non-commercial goals and structure, a description of constituent
group(s), its working mechanisms, leadership, and contact(s) -- unlike the
ALAC which has no posted working mechanisms, an incomplete structure, no
contact data on its discussion list (the e-mail addresses of all the
"representatives" are replaced with XXXXX), no working public forum and no
publicly archived public comments. 5.  Then, the non-profit must be
convinced to submit in electronic form a completed application and to
provide the ALAC any further requested documentation (which may include
references, documents to verify general funding sources, documents on the
organization's leadership and operations, and documents that demonstrate
the identity of all their individual constituents -- has anyone on this
Committee ever heard of the concept of privacy?).  The non-profit must 
also
be convinced that it must necessarily subject itself to the prospect of
further possible interviews regarding the organization's contact(s) and
must potentially provide other as yet unspecified information about the
organization. 6.  If the ALAC then decides to designate this organization
as an eligible "structure", the user that wishes to communicate with the
ICANN Board must next find at least three other such structures (that must
be located in at least two countries) and must persuade these structures 
to
form a regional organization. 7.  In order to form this regional body, the
user must then convince these other organizations to spend months and
months developing a set of bylaws that all organizations can agree upon,
and then the user must further convince each non-profit organization to
share in the financial burden of establishing this new umbrella
organization -- that means dedicating financial resources for the purpose
of incorporation, and setting aside funds to provide for an organizational
website, Secretariat services, and such. 8.  The user must also convince
each such non-profit organization that it's limited funds should be 
applied
to this glorious experiment instead of remitting such limited funds as the
membership fee for direct participation in ICANN's Non-Commercial
constituency (which at least gets to participate in the election of an
ICANN director). 9.  If the regional organization is finally created, then
the user must await the formulation of a formal Memorandum of 
Understanding
with ICANN which consecrates this effort...  (for some reason, this
Committee of the Mentally-Challenged seems to think that the At-Large is 
so
gullible that it will willingly enter into a contract with ICANN in the
full knowledge that ICANN has broken all of its prior promises, ignored 
the
consensus conclusions of its own Blue Ribbon Panel (the ALSC) and has
gleefully wiped out all user representation on its Board). 10.  Finally, 
if
this last stage is achieved, the user can then send his comments to the 
two
members of the ALAC that his regional organization has elected.  Those two
members will then transmit his message to the full committee that will 
next
proceed to filter, mangle, distort, and re-write his comments (after
sincerely thanking him for his input).  The ALAC will then transmit a
non-binding "recommendation" to the Board that in turn will thank the
committee for its efforts before proceeding to ignore the comments
received.

As a user, I don't need this degree of structural bullshit just to 
communicate my sentiments directly to ICANN.  The problem is not the lack
of a structured vehicle to serve as a communications conduit... the 
problem
has always been that the Board has been comprised of members that can't be
bothered to listen to the voice of the public that they purportedly serve. 



This ALAC plan sucks.  Unfortunately, the spineless worms on the Committee
will never advocate for substantive change.  Instead, they will meekly
accept the bylaws as written and will continue to pretend to "represent"
the At-Large.  All hail the Company Union. -- This message was passed to
you via the ga@dnso.org list. Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to
unsubscribe ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message). Archives at
http://www.dnso.org/archives.html


------- End of forwarded message -------