I have to strongly disagree that the ALAC is even worth keeping - it is an exclusionary mechanism that contrasts very badly against the very successful system of direct elections of directors that existed before the ALAC. Moreover, the bias and prejudice against the public that is built into the ALAC becomes more than glaringly apparent when compared to the red-carpet treatment and direct access to fundamental policymaking that ICANN affords to its industrial "stakeholders". The best thing that can be done with the ALAC is to erase it from existance. As for Byzantine structure - Just because one can draw an org chart does not mean that something is not excessively complicated. ICANN's one and single job should be to ensure that DNS query packets in the upper tiers of DNS are efficiently, accurately, and reliably transformed into DNS reply packets with no prejudice for or against any query source or query subject. That's a job that can be done by a tiny organization. Instead ICANN has grown into a kudsu that has overtopped all limits and has done so in the name of the public interest. If ICANN is so dedicated to the public interest, why has it created such a massive disaster, the ALAC, which despite massive infusions of life support it is still moribund while its predecessor, a system of direct elections for seats that really mattered became vibrant and reached several hundred thousand people in a matter of months? As for the removal of the messages, I heard that it was not on the blog but in ICANN's official registrar and registry comment forums and email lists. If so, that goes far beyond matters of net etiquitte.