Bret A. Fausett a écrit:
>
> Rather than amending the Bylaws, another solution to the "3 NSI reps is
> too many" problem would have been to either (a) allow prospective
> registries and existing registries in alternate roots to be members, or
> (b) adopt the "open" vs. "closed" TLD model (which NSI itself advocated).
> In either scenario, NSI would have been sorely outnumbered, and it's
> doubtful that it would have received enough votes to get *any*
> representatives on the Names Council.
Ah, the voice of reason and intelligence! But why help the board by
offering them reasonable measures? Let them wallow in the mire they
have created. In any case, the bylaws mean nothing, as ICANN has
already more than amply proven. The bylaws of ICANN, like the
procedural rules of the DNSO, are just another sleight-of-hand to
trick the unwary.
============================================================
Michael Sondow I.C.I.I.U. http://www.iciiu.org
Tel. (212)846-7482 Fax: (603)754-8927
============================================================
