If PIR is violating its own advisory charter, why do they expect to have .org renewed?
Hello, According to the .org Advisory Council Charter: http://www.pir.org/PDFs/pir_ac_charter.pdf "Section 3:... No two members of the Council will be from the same non-commercial organization." Michael Mann and Angela Stuber are both from Grassroots.org: http://www.pir.org/AboutPIR/CouncilMembers.aspx http://www.grassroots.org/page.ww?section=Highlights&name=Content+Detail+-+Volunteer http://www.grassroots.org/page.ww?section=About&name=Board+of+Directors Apparently, when this was brought to the attention of PIR, instead of rectifying the issue, they "did not see a problem with it". http://www.domainstate.com/showthread.php3?s=&postid=327276#post327276 I have nothing against Grassroots.org, but perhaps ICANN and the public should seriously consider whether PIR, an organization that seemingly has no regard for their own charter, should be operating such an important registry as .org. Indeed, with presumptive renewal, it would be next to impossible to remove a registry operator. This is yet another reason why presumptive renewal should never exist in any registry agreement. Sincerely, George Kirikos http://www.kirikos.com/