At 10:42 AM 6/12/99 , Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 12, 1999 at 06:14:11AM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:43:00 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >Yes, it was NSI that was booted. The ICANN board modified their
>> >original position in response to widely held public opinion (just as
>> >you claim they never do), and restricted NSI to one seat.
>>
>> I take GREAT offense in your characterization here Kent!
>>
>> The widely held public opinion you quote here is ONLY the opinion of
>> the majority of the rest of the so called Names Council,
>
>No. It is not. The public opinion I refer to is that expressed
>during the Berlin meeting, where a *number* of speakers stood at the
>mikes and told the Interim Board on no uncertain terms that there was
>no way that NSI should be able to nominate 3 Names Council Members.
Democracy: 3 wolves and a sheep deciding what's for dinner.
-- Richard Sexton
Is ICANN a vehicle of law, or is it a vehicle of
whomever shouts the loudest at an open meeting?
(which, coincidentally, was held in conjunction
with an ISOC meeting)
Here's what the ICANN By-Laws say about this:
http://www.icann.org/bylaws-09apr99.html
VI-B:3(c) Members of each Constituency shall select three individuals to represent
that Constituency on the NC, no two of which may be, except with the consent of the
Board, citizens of countries in the same Geographic Region, as defined in Article V,
Section 6. Nominations within each Constituency may be made by any member of the
Constituency, but no such member may make more than one nomination in any single
Constituency; provided that this limitation shall not apply to any Constituency with
less than three members.
Please explain why this last clause was added,
if not to specifically address NSI's unique
situation!
>As a result of that strongly expressed public opinion the Board
>amended its original position, which would have given NSI the right
>to pick three Names Council Members. To be blunt, a lot of people
>were simply outraged that NSI should have that much influence on the
>Names Council.
To be blunt, this board is a sham.
They, along with the GAC, make up the rules as
they go, completely ignoring the White Paper,
their MoU with the Commerce Department, and
their own by-laws along the way.
Respectfully,
Jay Fenello
President, Iperdome, Inc.� 404-943-0524
-----------------------------------------------
What's your .per(sm)? http://www.iperdome.com
