[governance] Drop ALAC altogether??

[Jacqueline A. Morris]

Why suggest dropping the broad focus and keeping the narrow? To me it would
make more sense to do the opposite. So in that case, how about dropping the
NCUC as the ALAC is broader-based, and those who want to focus on gTLD
issues in the GNSO can, but we won't be restricted? Or making the NCUC a
sub-group of At Large, for those who want to focus on GNSO issues? 
Jacqueline

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 22:38
> To: 'Vittorio Bertola'; governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: RE: [governance] Drop ALAC altogether??
> 
> Vittorio stated
> 
> >A different question might be why do academic and civil rights groups
> >have to be split, part in the NCUC and part in the ALAC (and some
> >perhaps in both). That might make more sense.
> 
> I remain unconvinced at the necessity for both an ALAC and a NCUC in a
> sensible and efficient structure for channeling what might effectively
> be
> called relevant civil society input to a names and numbers
> organisation.
> 
> Alx added
> 
> >the NCUC (originally non-commercial domain-name holders, which we
> later
> >expanded to represent non-commercial interest in generic domain names)
> is
> >focused on generic domain names, whereas the ALAC covers all that
> ICANN
> >does and may attract the general user, i.e. not only generic names but
> also
> >ccTLD names, IP addresses, etc.
> 
> Historically relevant because of the forces at play and the insistence
> of
> Esther Dyson, but in a greenfields situation would you ever come up
> with a
> structure like that? I don't see great differentiation between those
> interest areas and those likely to want to be involved.
> 
> 
> Ian
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb at bertola.eu]
> Sent: 01 December 2007 13:12
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
> Subject: Re: [governance] Drop ALAC altogether??
> 
> Ian Peter ha scritto:
> > Sorry to raise yet another heresy,
> >
> > But why have ALAC at all when we have Non Commercial Users
> Constituency
> and
> > a Business Users Constituency? Don’t they cover all users who would
> get
> > involved in ALAC?
> >
> > I understand the historical reasons for ALAC, but if we are analyzing
> > structure (rather than power bases we wish to maintain) why have an
> ALAC
> and
> > a NCUC?
> 
> In addition to what Jacqueline already said, the viewpoint/interest of
> the average Internet user and the viewpoint/interest of the academic
> and
> NGO groups that make up the NCUC (and a good share of the ALSes as
> well)
> do not always coincide. In issues such as Whois, for example, we had in
> the At Large several people from consumer organizations and technical
> groups pushing for positions that are completely opposite to those of
> the NCUC and of the civil rights organizations, e.g. advocating full
> disclosure and authentication of whoever is behind a website, including
> individuals.
> 
> A different question might be why do academic and civil rights groups
> have to be split, part in the NCUC and part in the ALAC (and some
> perhaps in both). That might make more sense.
> --
> vb.                   Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu   <--------
> -------->  finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/  <--------
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.11/1161 - Release Date:
> 30/11/2007
> 12:12
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.11/1161 - Release Date:
> 30/11/2007
> 12:12
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
> 
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.12/1162 - Release Date:
> 11/30/2007 21:26
> 

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.16.12/1162 - Release Date: 11/30/2007
21:26
 

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance