An argument against change that is based on "it's built into the contract" (whether on this issue or something involving the contracted parties) always seem somewhere between disingenuous and unserious. Not to mention suggesting that there isn't a valid basis for objecting -- otherwise it would have been advanced instead. Sure, the terms of existing contracts may mean change cannot be immediate. But any given contract is not eternal. There's nothing to prevent ICANN revising future contracts as necessary. If the organization wants to change, of course. Bill Jouris Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android On Wed, Jul 27, 2022 at 2:53 AM, Roberto Gaetano via At-Large<at-large@atlarge-lists.icann.org> wrote: _______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org _______________________________________________ By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.