RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting.
I understand that and I do not believe that Tim's suggested change affects that at all. Chuck > -----Original Message----- > From: Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller@xxxxxxx] > Sent: Tuesday, June 09, 2009 10:20 AM > To: Tim Ruiz; Gomes, Chuck > Cc: avri@xxxxxxx; gnso-restruc-dt@xxxxxxxxx; Metalitz,Steven > Subject: RE: [gnso-restruc-dt] Followup from the meeting. > > Tim > I will need an important clarification on this. Forgive me > but I was not on the call. > > The text you proposed _seems to_ only say that the 3 seats > CURRENTLY assigned to NCUC will fold into NCSG. That's fine. > > I hope that it doesn't mean, that the seats are tied to NCUC > and NCUC will still exist, and that there will be some > constituency-based allocation of Council seats. > > Once the NCSG is created, there isn't supposed to be an NCUC > anymore. A generic constituency for "noncommercial users" > simply doesn't make sense as one constituency in a > "Noncommercial Stakeholders Group." The idea of our charter > is that NCSG would elect its Council seats on an integrated > basis, not on the basis of constituencies. > > So anything that permanently ties Council seats to specific > constituencies is not acceptable. > > Does everyone understand it this way? > > --MM >