The impact of these amendments is to centralize too much power
in the hands of the ICANN Board, at the expense of the DNSO and
its constituents.
The amendment to Section 2(a) of Article VI-B of the Bylaws
allows the ICANN Board to resolve disputes about which member of
a constituency is
The most objectionable proposal is the amendment to Section 2(f)
of Article VI-B of the Bylaws. This allows a vote of the ICANN
Board to remove duly elected Names Council members from office.
Even with a 3/4 majority requirement, I see no justification for
placing such power in the hands of the
Milton and all
Excellent comments here Milton. I could not agree more. I will
pass these on to our [INEGroup] board for review as well, I am fairly
sure that
they will meet with their approval.
IT seems that this ICANN (Initial?) Interim board again, and continues
to demonstrate that
Mikki and all,
One wonders, doesn't one Mikki? It might be worthwile for you to
elaborate in your own words as to what your thoughts are here.
I know what mine and INEGroups are, in this respect
Mikki Barry wrote:
The most objectionable proposal is the amendment to Section 2(f)
of
Milton Mueller a écrit:
The impact of these amendments is to centralize too much power
in the hands of the ICANN Board, at the expense of the DNSO and
its constituents.
What difference does it make, when the DNSO and all its
constituencies are in the hands of the same people who appointed
