Kim Davies wrote:
> auDA has given notice of an Extraordinary Meeting on August 13 to
> consider constitutional amendments to forbid a "supply related person"
> from being elected a director of demand class; and preventing multiple
> divisions within the same corporate group from having multiple
> memberships.
> 
> Presumably this is a measure to try and guard against the possibility
> of unfairly unbalancing auDA's board by stacking it full of supply-side
> representatives, however is the mechanism the right one? It seems to
> disenfranchise legitimate community members who may be indirectly
> connected with the domain name retailing business from participating as
> users.

I agree with you.  This strikes me as short-sighted.  The idea of having 
different stakeholder groups represented on the board is so that the 
perspectives of all those materially affected are brought before the 
board for its consideration.  However all of us inhabit different roles 
for different purposes, and board members are no different.  Marcus 
Franda in a book called "Governing the Internet" writes:

"the idea of a board member?s representation is not the public 
representational function of someone duly authorized by an election or 
other legitimizing process to speak for a large constituency. Rather, it 
is the idea that someone will know and understand a specific ... 
interest and be able to speak for that interest in forums where such 
interests are being challenged."

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm LLB (Hons) B Com
Internet and Open Source lawyer, IT consultant, actor
host -t NAPTR 1.0.8.0.3.1.2.9.8.1.6.e164.org|awk -F! '{print $3}'