Yes, thanks Milton et al.  I fully concur with the contents of this letter.

My personal feeling is that it is tremendously unfortunate that NPOC has
decided to act in such abject bad faith.  The only hope they could possibly
have of prevailing here would be that the Board would be so completely
devoid of due diligence that they would countenance the pure invention of a
wholly fake "technicality" to undermine a whole process where, in practical
terms, the outcome could not have been different anyway.

NPOC's representatives seem to have the lawyer-like arrogance to think that
they can always find some technical loophole in any formal rules in order
to game the system, or at least throw a monkey-wrench into it and bring it
to a halt.  All I can say is that it seriously erodes my image of otherwise
admirable organizations like the Red Cross to see their representatives
engaging in this sort of desperate, alienating and almost pathological
behavior.

Shame on you, NPOC.

(And what does this all mean for a "consensus-based" process of governance?
When the pointedly fractious attitude of tribal politics is brought into
our midst formally like this, like the one-sided ideological warfare in
Congress that brought the US to the brink of default, what hope is there
for any sort of good-faith deliberation?  It's hard for me to believe that
NPOC has any real purpose or mission other than to infiltrate the positions
of the trademark lobby into NCSG, or simply to bring NCSG to an effective
halt if that goal cannot be reached.  Unless and until there is compelling
evidence to the contrary, from this point on I will personally hold that
belief.)

Dan


--
Any opinions expressed in this message are those of the author alone and do
not necessarily reflect any position of the author's employer.



At 4:58 PM +0000 10/21/11, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>Dear NCSG members,
>The attached letter was sent to the Board today in response to the letter
>sent by Debra Hughes and Amber Sterling (a.k.a. the 'NPOC Leadership')
>asking the board to overturn our election. I think it explains the
>situation adequately, and I personally do not see any realistic
>possibility that the Board would do that. As the person who got stuck with
>the responsibility for writing it, I welcome member feedback on its
>content.
>
>Milton L. Mueller
>Professor, Syracuse University School of Information Studies
>Internet Governance Project
>http://blog.internetgovernance.org
>
>
>Content-Type: application/pdf; name="ncsg-response.pdf"
>Content-Description: ncsg-response.pdf
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="ncsg-response.pdf"; size=136993;
>	creation-date="Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:30:22 GMT";
>	modification-date="Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:30:22 GMT"
>
>Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:ncsg-response.pdf (PDF /«IC») (0012AD47)