On 10-Jul-14 10:54, Carlos Raúl G. wrote:
> Do we have a basic problem in the narrow definition of the NCSG,
> which which excludes many alliances we should look for?

Do you mean we do we only focus on things reated to gTLDs?
I think it is because that is what the GNSO charter is all about.

> While final users "represented" by many ISOC chapter delegates
> gravitate towards ALAC.

If an ISOC chapter wants to deal with all things ICANN, then At-Large is
the place to be - and eventually they can aspire to leadership of a RALO
and even get elected to ALAC.

But if an ISOC chapter, as some do, cares about gTLDs and wants to
participate in making gTLD policy recommendations, this is the place
to be.

In what way should we widen it within our gTLD focus mandate?

avri