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 *******************************