Re: [registrars] Elections and ICANN & NSI Contract

[Richard Lindsay <richard@interq.ad.jp>]

Peter,

I posted a response to Amadeu's comments, that emphasized my
strong belief that the regional NC reps do have a responsibility
to attempt to represent their geographic region.  However this
does not mean that I do not agree with your point that the NC 
reps must also attempt to present the broad consensus (as much as 
possible) of the entire Registrar constituency.  

In essence, they will have to wear two hats, until the time
when there is basically equal representation among every 
region (impossible, because there are 5 regions, and only 3 seats...)

During this critical phase though, I really don't see any problems
developing as far as different regions having different purposes.
As the process becomes more mature, the risk for this happening
remains however.

Best regards,
Richard

> Needless to say, I support Amadeu's arguments here, especially the crucial
> principle that candidates are expected to represent the whole global
> constituency of ICANN registrars, not just their own geographical region.
> 
> Peter Gerrand (on behalf of Clive Flory)
> ~~~~~~~~~~~ooOOoo~~~~~~~~~


_/_/_/interQ Incorporated
_/_/_/System Division
_/_/_/Director and General Manager
_/_/_/Richard A. S. Lindsay