[Fwd: Re: [atlarge-discuss] (fwd) Urgent input needed for ERC on At-Large***please respond by Monday morning***]

["l.corazon" <l.corazon@prodigy.net>]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] (fwd) Urgent input needed for ERC  on
At-Large***please respond by Monday morning***
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 21:48:25 -0600
From: "l.corazon" <l.corazon@prodigy.net>
To: Joanna Lane <jo-uk@rcn.com>
References: <DPEOJECBMOLLLJOFDNDPGEHJCLAA.jo-uk@rcn.com>

Membership recall ought to be a high priority on the black and white
print along
with open books and clear accounting. Could we appoint an interim
secretary to
take the gush of data in? I am not good at it. Cordley  Coit
Joanna Lane wrote:

> \Vittorio,
> The most important points to make to the ERC are:-
>
> 1) The ALAC must be more than an association of associations, or it could be
> deemed a Trade Association, which is not acceptable.
> 2) The ALAC must be run by elected officials. Top down appointment by ICANN
> Staff/ former members of the ALSC or even the ERC, is not acceptable.
> 3) The ALAC must facilitate representation in the ICANN process by
> participation. Any mechanism that seeks to deny direct membership for
> individuals is not acceptable.
>
> It you want to add my name to the list of those willing to assist by email,
> I will try to find the time.
>
> Regards,
> Joanna
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Vittorio Bertola [mailto:vb@vitaminic.net]
> > Sent: Friday, July 19, 2002 6:52 PM
> > To: atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de
> > Subject: [atlarge-discuss] (fwd) Urgent input needed for ERC on At-Large
> > ***please respond by Monday morning***
> >
> >
> > FYI - I just received this as a member of the ALOC:
> >
> > On Fri, 19 Jul 2002 15:31:06 -0700, "Denise Michel"
> > <denisemichel@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> >
> > >ICANN's ERC (Evolution and Reform Cmt.) has asked for assistance from
> > >members of the At-Large Organizing Committee in filling in the details of
> > >the Blue Print for Reform and the Board's subsequent Bucharest Resolution
> > >(see
> > http://www.icann.org/committees/evol-reform/status-report-15jul02.htm
> > >for more information).  Spcifically, the ERC has asked for our
> > ideas on how
> > >to structure an At-Large Advisory Committee (the ERC also will
> > continue to
> > >solicit public input on all aspects of reform).  The Board's Bucharest
> > >Resolution directs the ERC to "consider the creation of an At
> > Large Advisory
> > >Committee as a potential vehicle for informed participation in
> > ICANN by the
> > >broad user community" and the ERC has asked the ALOC to provide initial
> > >suggestions on this by ***July 26*** and detailed
> > recommendations by August
> > >16.  The ERC will then "take account of the input in making its
> > >recommendations to the Board and the ICANN community."
> > >
> > >***Please let me know by Monday morning, July 22 (PDT) if you
> > are available
> > >to work on this via email (phone if needed) next week.***
> > >
> > >Thanks.
> > >Denise
> > >
> > >Denise Michel
> > >denisemichel@sbcglobal.net
> > >408.867.1986
> > >775.521.0778 (fax)
> > >
> > >PS.  This aggressive schedule is necessitated by ICANN's
> > timeline: "The ERC
> > >currently intends to provide a first Interim Implementation Report to the
> > >community on or about 1 August 2002, and another such Interim
> > Implementation
> > >Report on or about 1 September 2002. A final set of ERC Implementation
> > >Recommendations will be posted on or about 1 October 2002. The Interim
> > >Implementation reports will set forth the ERC's then-current approach to
> > >implementation details, and will invite community comment on the matters
> > >discussed, probably generally following the format of the various ERC
> > >Working Papers that led up to the Blueprint for Reform."  Final
> > decisions by
> > >the Board are expected at the  Shanghai meeting 27-31 October 2002.
> >
> > Moreover, a couple of days ago, after the "Status Report" was
> > published by the ERC, I contacted privately a couple of Board members
> > (the ones with whom we could discuss a little in Bucharest) to ask
> > whether the Committee intended to build a specific task force to
> > assist it in detailing the feasibility and mechanisms of the ALAC.
> > Today I have received an answer that suggests me to discuss proposals
> > in the ALOC. I guess that the ALOC will be the main channel the
> > Committee will use to gather input from the public on the subject of
> > ALAC implementation (though I hope the usual public forums will be
> > usable as well).
> >
> > Of course, given the fact that we're in the middle of an election and,
> > as usual, time given is very short, I don't think that we have the
> > time to produce an official statement as an organization by July 26.
> > However, it seems that there will be up to August 16 to produce "final
> > recommendations", and I think the newly elected panel will be more
> > legitimate in contributing to them. Anyway I will surely submit some
> > personal ideas to the ALOC - and to this list.
> > --
> > vb.               [Vittorio Bertola - v.bertola [a] bertola.eu.org]<------
> > ----------------------> http://bertola.eu.org/ <--------------------------
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> > For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de