[NA-Discuss] For consideration at the monthly meeting

[Jacqueline A. Morris]

Doesn't the NARALO only exist in its context with At Large and ALAC re 
the MoU? Easy way to do it would be to create a constituency with the 
same people and leave NARALO with At Large.
Jacqueline
Danny Younger wrote:
> Alan, you may be right... or not.  At the very least we could have our Chair ask the ICANN General Counsel for an opinion.  
>
>
>
> --- On Sat, 9/27/08, Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
>   
>> From: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg at mcgill.ca>
>> Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] For consideration at the monthly meeting
>> To: "NA Discuss" <na-discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org>
>> Date: Saturday, September 27, 2008, 1:17 PM
>> I take issue with the statement that the NARALO could
>> continue as an 
>> At-Large RALO and be a GNSO constituency. I am pretty sure
>> that this 
>> would be over the line and not acceptable. It would (in my
>> opinion) 
>> have to be an either-or thing).
>>
>> Alan
>>     
>
>
>
>       
>
> ------
> NA-Discuss mailing list
> NA-Discuss at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.icann.org
>
> Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org
> ------
>