At 12:21 AM 4/27/2015, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On 26-Apr-15 23:57, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>>
>>I hope that NCSG members will understand the need to push for an
>>independent PTI board that contains IETF and RIR representatives as
>>well as naming community representatives.
>>
>>
>
>
>While we can make sure there is room for them, we cannot include
>them. Only the ICG can actually bring them in, if they wish to be
>brought in.
>
>I certainly favor making sure it is possible for them to be as
>involved in the PTI as they may decide they are willing to be. One
>of the ideas that was dead on arrival was the notion that instead of
>the Affiliate being their sole property of ICANN, it would be a
>shared resource among the 3 operational communities. That remains
>possible as an evolutionary path in the current proposal.
Why was that dead on arrival? What's the objection to having the 3
communities, rather than the ICANN board, in control of the PTI Board?
David
>
>----------
><http://www.avast.com/>
>Avast logo
><http://www.avast.com/>
>
>This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
><http://www.avast.com/>www.avast.com
*******************************
David G Post - Senior Fellow, Open Technology Institute/New America Foundation
blog (Volokh Conspiracy) http://www.washingtonpost.com/people/david-post
book (Jefferson's Moose) http://tinyurl.com/c327w2n
music http://tinyurl.com/davidpostmusic publications
etc. http://www.davidpost.com
*******************************