RE: [ga] Extension of the Interim Board Directors

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

> From: JandL [mailto:jandl@jandl.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 07, 2000 8:54 AM

> and the MAL?  The BoD may have attempted to disenfranchise us, 
> and we can let them OR the GA can raise its voice OR we can allow 
> ICANN to continue on its present course and totally disenfranchise 
> all individuals and small businesses.
> 
> Leah Gallegos

This latter case is interesting. Possible scenarios are;

that the CA AG does nothing, not unprecedented.
DOC does nothing, also not unprecedented
and US Congress does nothing, very much not unprecedented.

We wont consider CA legislature, they never do anything.

Don't forget the part about prosecutorial descretion, the CA AG doesn't HAVE
to do anything. He just prioritizes the issue near the bottom of his stack,
only to be dislodged via tactical nuke.

In this case, what are the possible options? The legally allowed options
actually run the gamut from passive boycotting (simply ceding the filed to
the opponent) to setting up a whole new organization in opposition.

However, the old Chinese admonishment applies ... "be careful whom you pick
as an enemy, for that is who you will become."
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html