[CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] Revised draft - Voting weights in community mechanism
james at cyberinvasion.net
Mon Jul 27 16:09:56 UTC 2015
For your own reference. The ALACs role is quite clearly specified in the AC chapeau in the by-laws
“The Board may create one or more Advisory Committees in addition to those set forth in this Article. Advisory Committee membership may consist of Directors only, Directors and non-directors, or non-directors only, and may also include non-voting or alternate members. Advisory Committees shall have no legal authority to act for ICANN, but shall report their findings and recommendations to the Board.”
And it its own bylaw description:
“The role of the ALAC shall be to consider and provide advice on the activities of ICANN, insofar as they relate to the interests of individual Internet users”
Insofar as they advise on policy development activities to the board as part of their role yes, but the ALAC is not directly responsible for policy development, that role is for the supporting organizations the ASO, ccNSO and GNSO.
From: accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org [mailto:accountability-cross-community-bounces at icann.org] On Behalf Of Dr Eberhard W Lisse
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2015 4:36 PM
To: CCWG Accountability
Cc: directors at omadhina.net
Subject: Re: [CCWG-ACCT] [WP1] Revised draft - Voting weights in community mechanism
I was previously unaware that the below was the ALAC's role, in particular the "charged with" part.
I thought At-Large was the name for the community of individual Internet users who participate in the policy development work of ICANN.
Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jul 27, 2015, at 15:49, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca<mailto:alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>> wrote:
the views of those charged with supporting the 3 billion Internet users,
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Accountability-Cross-Community