> -----Original Message-----
> Yes, GAC is where the multi-lateralists play hardball against multi-
> stakeholderism at ICANN, and it's valuable to have someone who already
> knows that game in deep detail so as to anticipate (or at least quickly
> recognize) their moves and prepare timely response from a pre-existing bag of
> tricks.

This assertion is not quite right, Dan, and I think we might all benefit from a clarification.
(I can't help being an educator! ;-)

Actually most of the individuals who represent governments in GAC think of themselves as full supporters of the multistakeholder model. Indeed, after working in the ICANN environment for years they become, relative to other governments, supporters of the ICANN regime. It's just that within that model, they want GAC to be more powerful or perhaps at least as powerful, than other stakeholder groups. The distinction is important because the main battle in Internet critical resources has never really been whether ITU or some intergovernmental agency will "take over" what ICANN does. The real issue has always been whether governments will "take over" or dominate ICANN.