Re: [ga] Who speaks for the ALAC?

[Karl Auerbach <karl@CaveBear.com>]

On Fri, 30 May 2003, Vittorio Bertola wrote:

> >At present ALAC is not defending Users. It is acquiescing. 

I wouldn't go so far as to say that it is acquescing.  That would be to 
attribute to the ALAC a degree of backbone and action on behalf of the 
internet user communit that I do not believe the ALAC posesses.

I perceive the ALAC as being nothing more than a powerless blob created
explicitly to do nothing more than cover, but not fill, an embarrassing
gap on ICANN's organizational chart - that gap being the fact that a body
who's purpose is to benefit the public has locked its doors against the
public.

> I don't think that the ALAC is "acquiescing" to anything

I do not agree.  The ALAC's statement that it will accept limitations that
are imposed on no other element of ICANN is, in a word, acquiescence.

The ALAC has the ability to say "no".  The ALAC has the power to stand up
and say that it will do no act that will further disempower the internet
public.

> We try to do our best to keep up ... ... (and still have a job, a life
> and so on)

I've burned about 40 to 60 hours a week on ICANN for several years now I
do not easily accept the excuse that says, in essence, "we will help the
public, but only in our spare time".

> .... But we are not afraid to speak when we think it's necessary.

The ALAC needs to learn to say "this shall not pass" and refuse to
continue to help ICANN bury the public interest under a tombstone that
says, "Here lies the public voice in internet governance, never really
born, aborted by ICANN, without a wimper of objection from the ALAC, under
a think smothering bureaucratic blanket of RALOs, Structures, Liasons, and
Committees"

		--karl--





--
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