[ncdnhc-discuss] Membership Status ofSiliconValleyPublicAccess Link

[Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales]

Kent, Chun and all:

Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 10:01:49AM +0900, Chun Eung Hwi wrote:
> > Dear Vany and others,
> >
> > With regard to this issue, I think Adam is basically right because I
> > believe it a right procedure for raising up a quesiton. But Vany's comment
> > seems to be irrelevant because in our constituency, the contact point of
> > one member organization is closely associated with the organization
> > itself.
>
> I don't believe that is true in general for non-commercial
> organizations.  There are many many non-commercial organizations that
> run almost entirely off of volunteer effort, and many of those
> volunteers work for commercial companies.

Kent here read my mind because I was about to send an e-mail with similar
reasoning.

I want to add that our charter doesn't prevent that a delegate to the NCDNHC
from his/her organization works also
independently as whatever they want in whatever commercial, government,
non-commercial business, etc whether has
ICANN interests or not.  The only warning NCDNHC charter makes reference is
when such delegate in the NCDNHC is also
delegate in other constituency.  Dave Crocker is not representing any other
interest inside ICANN.  Then, as such there's no
reason why challenge him as a delegate by his organization in the NCDNHC.

If Milton, Chun, or anyone wants to modify the by-laws, I think that instead of
challenging sitautions about memberships and delegations that are not specified
in NCDNHC charter, they should follow the proper procedures for charter
modification.

This kind of attacks doesn't make any good to the NCDNHC, and specially
prevents that people with the spirit, courage and knowledge, participate
constructively in the NCDNHC.

Best Regards
Vany






--
Nilda Vany Martinez Grajales
Information Technology Specialist
Sustainable Development Networking Programme/Panama
e-mail: vany at sdnp.org.pa
http://www.sdnp.org.pa