At 01:59 PM 8/9/99 +0200, you wrote:
>Joop,
>
>You wrote:
>
>>
>> After the next's day's session with the Board and following deliberation
>in
>> camera the Board came with it's resolution to change the bylaws and limit
>> NSI to one seat.
>>
>> I do not recall any other instance that "consensus" was asked or measured
>> on the gTLD seats.
>> Let any other Berlin participant correct me in case my memory is faulty.
>>
>
>Off my memory (I did not double check the tape), the subject was picked up
>again towards the end of the afternoon, during a discussion on the status of
>the testbed.
>
>The subject of the testbed, and the poor management thereof by NSI,
>triggered again the debate on the gTLD Constituency. I believe that it was
>George Conrades to mention that, if NSI was not willing to autolimit their
>participation to the Council to one representative, the Board would have
>changed the bylaws to ensure that the spirit of the "one person max. per
>organization" would have been applied.
>There was a considerable expression of satisfaction (applause), that I would
>have called consensus.
Yes, but you adroitly miss addressing the other issue... Richard Sexton
also brought up the question of additional gTLD DNSO NC representatives.
That issue has never been properly addressed.
Gene...
>
>Incidentally, may I remind that there were also two persons elected
>independently to the Name Council by two different Constituencies that
>worked for the same organization, MCI.
>One of the two has resigned.
>
>Regards
>Roberto
>
>
++++++++++
Gene Marsh
president, anycastNET Incorporated
330-699-8106
