ALAC RoP-Revision3-Approval-2016-09-09

.PDF (clean).PDF (redline).DOCX (redline)Log of Changes (compared to ALAC RoP-Revision2-2016-07-03)
ALAC RoP-Revision3-For_Approval-Clean-20160909.pdfALAC RoP-Revision3-For_Approval-Redline-20160909.pdfALAC RoP-Revision_3-Log.pdf

ALAC RoP-Revision2-2016-07-03 (approved and adopted on 30 June 2016 in ICANN56 Helsinki

CleanRed Line

ALAC RoP-Version2-Draft-2016-06-06_2



ALAC RoP-Version2-Draft-2016-06-06_2-Addendum


The Draft changes include options for Section 19.11.4. A description of the options can be found at

ALAC RoP Version 2 - Change Log 


More information:

  • No labels


  1. I am pleased to see the continuation of adoption of consensus as the preferred decision-making format. 

    Let the record show I take profound and deep exception to 5.12.  On general principle, I am vehemently against all forms of censorship, howsoever enabled. 

    On general principle and free born as I am, I take exception to any man or woman determining by diktat what I, an adult of sound mind and yet sensate, must think. Or say. Or, publish. That is entirely disagreeable.

    Specific to this RoP, I am sure the ALAC Chair is, was and shall be fine people.  But I am unalterably opposed to any person, even one acting purportedly selflessly in the public interest and "at his/her sole discretion", to decide at any time on my right to think, to write down, to share and publish and to be heard.

    Some may say that it is inconceivable that a duly elected ALAC Chair may go off on a frolic all of his/her own. I prefer that I am not placed in a position to defend the downstream consequences as may arise in that event. 


    1. Carlton, just to be clear, this section of the RoP is not new. It was in the RoP as approved in 2013 (with your support as an ALAC member at the time - and was in the earlier RoP dating back to 2007 in essentially the same form, except that version gave the Chair the decision rather than just a recommendation to staff.


  2. I take Carlton's point, BUT I do want someone to be able to take quick action if any ALAC member is behaving very badly, particularly in ways that could harm someone, and/or ALAC and/or ICANN. I do think it would be fairer if the Chair were required to at last notify the individual and, if possible, discuss the issue before taking action or, if quick action is required, at least notify and discuss the issue with the relevant miscreant.

    1. Note that this applies to all lists and platforms including those open to all comers. At times, quick action must be taken for legal reasons. For actions such as suspensions, any that I am aware of have always come at the end of a LONG process.