My further responses inline Dear Becky Thank you very much for your replies. However, I feel we should separate intentions from facts in such replies and/or clarifications. In this regard, although only 0.1% (in your estimation) of the instances the carve-out would apply are those where the Board decision is consistent with the Bylaws, the fact is that the carve-out rule makes no such distinction, correct? Correct, that distinction is not made in the context of any of the community powers and was not made in the GAC carve-out context until the Board’s recent intervention. As to the participation of any other SO and AC on both tracks, I kindly asked to confirm a fact (that any other SO or AC may fully participate, with the only exception pf the GAC). I infer that you are confirming it, right? Yes, I think that’s perfectly obvious Jorge. (Reasons for doing so are something different and have been discussed and no full agreement found to date if I dare say so.) thanks again and regards Jorge Von meinem iPhone gesendet Am 22.02.2016 um 14:54 schrieb Burr, Becky <Becky.Burr@neustar.biz<mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz><mailto:Becky.Burr@neustar.biz>>: J. Beckwith Burr Neustar, Inc. / Deputy General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer 1775 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Washington D.C. 20006 Office: +1.202.533.2932 Mobile: +1.202.352.6367 / neustar.biz<http://www.neustar.biz>