Hello Bill (and thanks for your earlier response to my concerns). The registrant rights document was proposed over two years ago, and the amendment regarding registrant rights was put forth by Staff about a year ago, so it's nice to know that the NCUC membership is keen to finally get involved after years of non-involvement. FWIW, I'm looking forward to see how your group deals with the fact that the no-third-party-beneficiaries-clause precludes any contractual legal rights accruing to the registrant. By the way, you may want to point all concerned NCUC members to the working group list at http://forum.icann.org/lists/gnso-rrc-a/ We haven't exactly seen a flood of NCUC folk knocking at the gate to get involved in this effort, but perhaps this will soon change. More important, of course, is the need for amendments to improve the RAA. Yes, we all know that the NCUC has been occupied with other matters during the last two years, but here's your chance to demonstrate that your 80 organizational and 89 individual members are more than just names on a list. Feel free to point the NCUC membership to the discussion archives at http://forum.icann.org/lists/raa-consultation/index.html The constituency may also wish to send a number of designees to the GNSO's Sub-Team B Working Group. Now let's get to heart of the matter concerning the NCUC proposal -- when an incumbent organization with a fair number of members says to a new constituency (with a necessarily limited number of members) let's decide everything by way of the democratic election process, all we see is "advantage incumbent" -- a stacked deck wherein numerical superiority is used as a tool to disenfranchise others; yes, it's a capture mechanism. Truth be told, there are six NCSG seats to go around, and it sure looks like the NCUC doesn't want to share and play nice. regards, Danny