Adam, I appreciate your willingness to bluntly express opinions about nominees. But I don't agree with your assessment of Karl at all. I know that you have much more moderate and protective views about ICANN than Karl (and I), but if you disagree with his policy positions you need to make that clear, not malign his personality and spread provably wrong statements about his participation. I think Karl has gotten a bad rap because the early ICANN self-selected Board deliberately tried to isolate and marginalize him. The Board did some really nasty things, like instantly modifying the bylaws so that he and other the elected members could not participate in the new TLD selection, or forming an Executive Committee composed of a small minority of cronies which made all the real decisions, and then railroading those decisions . To resist this, Karl ended up looking like a marginalized, protest Board member - which he was. But the point is that the ICANN Board at that time badly NEEDED a vocal protest member. Regarding communication, Karl appeared in as many if not more NCUC meetings than any other Board member - but it would be hard for you to know that, Adam, because you almost never attend NCUC meetings. I think the last NCUC meeting you attended was in Yokohama 2000, which preceded Karl's installment as a Board member. While you are a valued participant on our list, I sincerely believe that Karl has appeared in more NCUC/NCDNHC meetings than you. Regarding list communication, I think if you check the NCDNHC archives from the period when our list was open, you will find active participation from Feb.-April 2002. It is true that he showed more interest in At Large than NCDNHC most of the time. But: 1) he was elected by the At Large, and 2) the nomination is for a civil society representative, not an NCUC representative per se. If you can, try to put forward a technically-oriented person from NorthAmerica who is more accountable and more wise to the ways of Internet governance politics than Karl. --MM