So, the NPOC can articulate no point of difference between itself and the NCUC in terms of who they represent, other than some trends to policy disparity. The NPOCs entire existence appears predicated on the idea that if two groups of essentially similar organisations have policy differences, the only possible solution is to leap immediately to forming a new Constituency. Has this ever happened in any other group? Every successful constituency has been formed on the basis of a structural similarity of the organisations operation within ICANN. The NPOC is, quite clearly, a proposal to form form a second constituency for exactly the same type of group as NCUC to cover policy disparity. I certainly feel there are structural problems within ICANN that make the proper articulation of public policy perspectives difficult, as the Constituency silo system can force groups together that have serious disagreements on policy. But this proposal seems to dedicatedly aim at making those problems worse, not better, by proposing that if two groups of the same type don't happen to share policy positions they should be two separate oonstituencies. The solution to the problems with the ICANN Constituency silo system is not to just keep building more silos on slimmer and slimmer grounds. The solution is groups that reach across silos, and a system that doesn't assume everyone in the same constituency happens to share a policy positions or interests just because they come from a similar structural basis. That is what the NCSG push to move from Constituencies to Interest Groups is about. The NPOC just seems to demonstrate why Constituencies are a bad idea. Basically, it seems that the NPOC is a big sounding group that serves a really small purpose - a home for people who would like to be in the IPC but who should be in NCSG not CSG. There is a real issue here - ATUG seems to be an example of a corresponding organisation that would like to be in NCUC, but should be in CSG not NCSG, and that same issue effects some other consumer organisations - but making more and more Constituency silos isn't the answer. David