Re: [ncc-charter] charter amendment - non-voting members?

From: Kent Crispin (
Date: Tue Sep 05 2000 - 09:01:53 PDT

  • Next message: Milton Mueller: "Re: [ncc-charter] charter amendment - non-voting members?"

    On Tue, Sep 05, 2000 at 10:23:31AM -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
    > This is not true. The B&C constituency, upon which our language is
    > modelled, does not.

    Jeez, Milton, it would help if you paid attention. I quoted that very
    BC language, and in *fact* it has no restriction based on membership in
    another constituency. Their language very carefully dodges that bullet
    by defining the character of the organizations excluded and not
    mentioning membership in a constituency.

    If our language was modeled on theirs, then our drafters did a lousy job
    of following the model. And if you would have read just a bit more you
    would have discovered that I proposed language that *was* modeled on the
    BC language as a possible replacement that won't run foul of the ICANN

    It would just be silly to use language that obviously contradicts those
    bylaws, when you can get the same effect with other language that
    doesn't contradict the bylaws.

    Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Sep 05 2000 - 09:02:07 PDT