I don't think there is any cause to get bent out of shape.  This was done in the personal capacities like the letter sent by community leaders to Fadi & Steve earlier in the week (and with plenty of notice).  

But if there is any question, I suggest we open it up for individual members to endorse so there can be no question exactly who supports what.  And we can even up it up for endorsements to others outside our individual community to join if they share the concern and want a review and explanation of the issue.  I understand that the Intellectual Property Constituency and also the ISP Constituency will send endorsements as well.  It would be good the entire community to weigh in on the issue.

Thanks,
Robin


On Aug 29, 2014, at 8:43 PM, Avri Doria wrote:

> Signed PGP part
> 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
> 
>