Karl,
Thanks for running through the history, but it still looks to me
reasonable to suppose that the BoD will be able (is charged, in
fact) to evaluate a proposal originatng from an SO in the light of all
other inputs. Just because DNSO says it wants WIPO rules, say,
doesnt mean it's automatically approved.
Admittedly, AL membership accounts for 'only part' of the Board
(fully half, as I understand it, which is some better than 1/7), but it
does seem that (some of) the AL membership could start to
practice *thinking like an SO, if that's what it would take to bring
individual-based interests (including domain-name-owners in
particular) into play under 2.e.(4):
> Section 2: RESPONSIBILITIES AND POWERS
>
> (e) Subject to the provisions of Article III, Section 3, the Board
> shall accept the recommendations of a Supporting Organization if the
> Board finds that the recommended policy
...
> (4) is not reasonably opposed by any other Supporting Organization.
>
If that is not feasible as the Bylaws stand, then the AL contingent
might find it worthwhile to focalize around *making it feasible.
Living in San Jose may not be their "single overiding interest," but
there must be one out there somewhere. Otherwise the Board will
have 9 members who simply vote as they see fit, and the
'representation' farce continues.
> No recommendation of a Supporting Organization shall be adopted unless
> the votes in favor of adoption would be sufficient for adoption by the
> Board without taking account of [*]either the Directors selected by the
> Supporting Organization or their votes[*].
Now there's an interesting phrase! Does anyone (Diane?) have an
exegesis?
kerry
