Re: [ga] Santiago DNSO GA Chair

[Javier <javier@aui.es>]

Michael,

I thought that you were a little more constructive... but here is the
answer anyway.

Please read the Berlin resolution regarding this fact. It says that NSI
would have only one representative in the Names Council, and that if it
tried to force te presence of three, ICANN would be forced to change the
Bylaws, which it is in the process of doing now.

The provisional NC is a committee of ICANN and -as such- follows the
resolutions of the ICANN Board and its interpretation of the bylaws.

NSi was told in the first meeting of the Names Council (june 12th) that
they could only have one representative, and that if they had a problem
with that, they should talk to the ICANN Board, not to us. Now ICANN has
decided that they can have three until the bylaws are changed, which will
happen soon.

The minutes of that meeting are published in the DNSO website.

Any other violations of the bylaws you can think of? As our mailing list is
public and so are our meetings, they should be easy to spot.

Next time please consult the archives.

Javier

At 12:11 6/08/99 +0200, Michael Froomkin wrote:
>In light of the comment quoted below, I would be grateful if you could
>lay to rest once and for all an allegation I have seen often repeated: 
>It is alleged that the pNC refused to allow certain duly selected
>representatives of the gTLD constituency to attend a telephone meeting
>held a few weeks ago.
>
>Is this factually inaccurate?  
>Were the people not actual delegates? 
>Or, was the refusal to allow their participation not a violation of the
>bylaws?
>
>Javier SOLA wrote:
>[....]
>
>> 
>> You know quite well that the pNC has at no point violated the bylaws.
>> 
>[....]
>
>
>-- 
>A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
>U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
>+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
>                -->   It's hot there.   I'm elsewhere.   <--
>