Hi,

I felt Bruce message was explaining the obvious as somehow I have thought what was indicated as option 1 in paragraph 23 of Annex 2 of REC2 was rightly the only escalation path to spill the board.

I will encourage this group to be careful about this especially as we now have the case of the "carve out" as allowing "option 2" implies that there will be no opportunity for board's action on GAC advice to be reviewed fairly.

Removal of board members should be the height in the escalation path and not what should be done as first step action(as implied by option 2), there should be an independent review indicating that based on xyz the board's action is not inline with the bylaw. The community should then make their independent decisions based on that(especially if board refuse to comply) to escalate to the next step of spilling the board as may be appropriate.

Regards