[council] Comments on the ALSC Final report

[DannyYounger@cs.com]

Philip,

please forward these comments to the structure TF:

Knowing that the Names Council has not even considered the vote of the 
General Assembly to reorganize the DNSO, we consider the current Council 
effort to offer the ICANN Board guidance on Structure to be as fraudulent as 
the efforts of the ALSC.  Although this Task Force will ignore our opinions 
in much the same manner as the ALSC ignored all public comments, these views 
are being tendered for the sake of the public record, and we look forward to 
the continued oversight of the Department of Commerce.

When a report is drafted on the At-Large by a Committee that does not include 
any At-Large Directors, no prior At-Large candidates, nor any At-Large 
members, and which disregards all the bottom-up comments tendered by the 
At-Large in an open Public Forum, such a report must be thoroughly 
repudiated.  Members of the General Assembly through their comments to the 
Public Forum have joined with our At-Large Directors in rejecting this ALSC 
fraud that is being foisted upon the Internet Community.

The ALSC report neither documents its conclusions nor justifies its 
recommendations.  In short, the report is nothing more than the self-serving 
opinions of a narrow group of ICANN insiders that seek to present ICANN 
board-squatters and their supporters with a "blue-ribbon panel approach" to 
further augment their power at the expense of the At-Large.  

It is our belief that we have a founding compact with our US government to 
seat nine At-Large Directors.  Any group that claims that consensus exists to 
break our contract with our government is acting as a destabilizing force 
that threatens the continuity of our service as the private entity charged 
with the management of the Internet.   One breaks a contract with a sovereign 
nation at one's peril.  Claiming that this contract must be broken because it 
stemmed from "fuzzy thinking" and was predicated on an "unsound logical 
basis" is an unmitigated insult to the US government that through its 
Department of Commerce ratified this compact.

Esther Dyson, on behalf of ICANN, made the following commitment on November 
6, 1998:  "Some remain concerned that the Initial Board could simply amend 
the bylaws and remove the membership provisions that we have just described 
above. We commit that this will not happen."  Breaking this compact after the 
Chairman of the ICANN Board has warranted that this will not happen is the 
ultimate abuse of trust.  That such abuse is to be expected from the corrupt 
organization that ICANN has become does not lessen our resolve to abide by 
our founding compact and to abide by our promises.

We recall the words of the White Paper:  "Most of those who criticized the 
proposed allocation of Board seats called for increased representation of 
their particular interest group on the Board of Directors".  As we examine 
the self-serving position papers of most of the DNSO constituencies, we 
recognize that these groups intend to engorge themselves like vultures on the 
carcass of the At-Large.  Their only desire is to enhance their power at the 
expense of the representation of others.  We do not find it surprising that 
those that would seek to deny a role to both individuals and registrants 
within the DNSO also seek to support the ALSC recommendations to deny the 
At-Large the representation that it was promised.   

The General Assembly through its comments to the Public Forum has supported 
the original concept of At-Large Directors functioning as an equal 
counterbalance to the Directors drawn from the Supporting Organizations. We 
find there to be no justification whatsoever to break promises made to the 
Internet community.