[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Comment-Dnso] Amendments to ICANN By-Laws.

Dear ICANN Board:

I hasten to respond to your request for comments.

The first comment is somewhat trivial:

In the following paragraph, I think "...no two of which may be..." should read "... no two of whom may be...". 

"Each Constituency shall select up to three individuals to represent that
Constituency on the NC, no two of which may be, except with the consent of the
Board, residents of the same Geographic Region, as defined in Article V, Section
6. Notwithstanding the foregoing, no Constituency may have more representatives
on the NC than there are members of the Constituency. 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."

For my authority, I call upon a phrase in Japanese -- "common sense".  It is just common sense that no corporate entity should be entitled to a larger participation in the affairs of the Names Council. 

It is interesting to contemplate how things will work out if and when there are two members of the gTLD Registry Constituency.  They*could* reach a deadlock in which no candidate could get a majority in a vote for anything.  On contentious issues, there could not be a vote of over 50%.


"A hog seldom dies a natural death."
Ulric B. Bray
(Anyone for bacon?)