[ncdnhc-discuss] ICANN committee recommends voting restrictions,fewer At-Large di rectors

[Adam Peake]

>At 03:02 AM 8/29/2001, Adam Peake wrote:
>>Note, I am in favor of the nine/nine division, I voted as such in
>>Yokohama, I just
>
>Adam,
>
>Why do you want a single constituency to be able to capture control of the
>board?


Dave,

The 9/9 arrangement was the consensus that emerged after much careful 
discussion among many parties over the summer and autumn of 1998. 
ICANN was founded on that consensus and some related promises to the 
US Government. I like the consensus model, I think it's a good thing 
to strive for and once achieved it should not just be dumped: the 9/9 
arrangement should be tried and given the opportunity to work.

Why do you believe the At Large is a single constituency and is open 
to capture?
Who would capture?
How would they capture?
and then how would the control the board?

Thanks,

Adam



>d/
>
>
>----------
>Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker at brandenburg.com>
>Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
>tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464
>
>_______________________________________________
>Discuss mailing list
>Discuss at icann-ncc.org
>http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss