It strikes me that NSI has launched a serious offensive on the Hill and in the press in
order to attack ICANN's board. This seems like a very sound strategy since the Board
looks a tad authoritarian in having asked NSI to restrict its constituency to one
NC member. Even a disinterested observer might ask how ICANN can craft such an exception to its
own rules.
They look all the more authoritarian in light of their refusal to reconize an individual's
constituency while pushing for quick action on the WIPO draft over the protests of
most commenters (many of whom, I was advised by Esther) had their comments deleted
from the posting site. Now would seem to be a good moment for the burning glare of publicity.
My only concern is this: if I were in Esther's shoes, and I truly didn't see any problem
whatsoever in the WIPO draft, I wouldn't hesitate to further withhold IDNO recognition now. She
can claim that NSI is at least as guilty as the board in dispensing two seats like patronage, suggest that
this solves the IDNO new constituency problem, and potentially have a less vociferous IDNO on the dispute
resolution process (because we're locked in with NSI).
Being so late to the fair, maybe I'll find out all this has already been discussed and resolved. Hope so.
This is a very interesting development!
Dennis Schaefer
----------
> ICANN's Board *asked* NSI to relinquish the seats. NSI can refuse.
> If it does, ICANN's Board indicated that it would change its bylaws to
> eliminate
> the seats. But that is a decision that can be opposed, both internally, and
> publicly.
> If the rationale for the decision is that NSI shouldn't have too many seats,
> how
> can they object if the seats are assigned to non-NSI NC members?
> --MM
>
> Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > > I am passing on to you a letter that I received today from Don Telage.
> >
> > These two seats that NSI is giving away -- are they real in the sense that
> > the ICANN board has done something to reverse its Berlin decision to limit
> > the NSI-constituency to one seat?
> >
> > Or is this a move to try to get ICANN's board to reverse that decision?
> >
> > --karl--
> >
> > --
> > This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
> > a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
> > For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/
>
>
>
>
> --
> This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send
> a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz.
> For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/
-- This message was sent via the idno mailing list. To unsubscribe send a message containing the line "unsubscribe idno" to listmanager@radix.co.nz. For more information about the IDNO, see http://www.idno.org/