-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

I see that a reconsideration request has been filled with the NCSG
listed as requester, signed by Steve DelBianco of the Business
Constituency.

https://www.icann.org/en/system/files/files/request-bc-rysg-ncsg-29aug14-en.pdf

Was NCSG listed with NCSG permission?

If so, when did the NCSG-PC approve this?  Or have we gotten to the
point that we no longer bother getting approval for such things?  I
may be the only one who objects to this, especially since it is made
on flawed ground, but I do not remember any consensus calls on the issue

Seems somewhat ironic that we are complaining about the process
infractions of others when we no longer seem to care about about NCSG
processes.

No matter what the merits of the case, the fact that this was
submitted in the NCSG's name without an NCSG decision to do so, is of
great concern.

In so far as we may or may not have formal procedures that we are
using, I object to this action and request of review of what process
was followed in our decision to participate and clarification as to
who made the decision?

If on the other hand it was submitted in our name without
authorization, then I request that an amendment to the request be
filed indicating that there was no authorization for the NCSG to be
listed on the reconsideration request.

avri
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (MingW32)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUAUhXAAoJEOo+L8tCe36HdxUIAItGdnWFq0sjx+CksgabeW2f
dYsF8RgWu22Q+MeQmK+ssx3mMkRCitvcAuujjfgFZ0hH0JrUaZs4QBy0EdjwlYkl
SmIRpl4WzsVfd7k1a/keeGeuiIQaK4Vw+GodqhqCc2KamR2lqLs9FQm2D29qUTRT
tAXS4c4C7pYnaEScqoXUOXOdG33axPw6QZY9xt4bFvFO8OA0llBBTSSpJIIyTpn9
H5X/hDl9VceCQiIwmPslhUAW5KKo28pqhYaFEG60SjcYkgCbwbXIBmNZQDlTposu
pbXvAdYY+UQwUF8FM/MB7Ige1R1Pp9UGWLXSf9TPx85tnZT9/QP7wryP69Sm5bs=
=7BFL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----