- EURO-Discuss - lists.icann.org

Re: [EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

See below. On 08/05/07, Thomas Roessler <roessler(a)does-not-exist.org> wrote: > On 2007-05-08 13:05:50 +0200, Roberto Gaetano wrote: > > > I don't know what was the past correspondence, and I assume that > > this is a question that ultimately will end, for a change :<(, > > with the lawyers, but my understanding since the beginning was > > that the relationship between ICANN and EURALO, including the > > modus operandi of EURALO within ALAC, was going to be governed by > > the MoU. > > I'm amazed by the role that, supposedly, the lawyers and the rules > are playing here. > > On the one hand, there still isn't a clear indication what the > status of the MoU really is -- is it binding, on whom, and so on. > That would have been a set of questions that should have been > resolved before the MoU was formally signed. > I'm afraid the above isn't a correct statement. The MoU is binding upon those who signed it. It is not binding upon those who have not. > On the other hand, some folks are so in love with the idea that > there is a binding MoU that they now start calling lawyers to > interpret the text that they wrote themselves just a month ago. > > Frankly, this style of discussion speaks badly of the things that > are to come in the European RALO. > > Can't we have the discussion how to best represent the diverse > perspectives that are present here in ICANN -- instead of talking > about what diversity rules are in the MoU and what aren't? > > Can't we talk about how the different perspectives can collaborate > constructively -- instead of having the current style of discussion > which is, quite frankly, divisive to the point that I'm tempted to > write all this off as an exercise in futility? > > -- > Thomas Roessler <roessler(a)does-not-exist.org> > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

transparency on changes of rules
by Annette Muehlberg May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Dear Nick, You just wrote: "Whilst no impediment to participating in the work of the organisation is otherwise envisaged, it was strongly felt that only ALSes who are a party to the MoU with ICANN should cast votes in the upcoming election." It is hard to understand the deeper significance of this sentence, especially for non-native english speakers. After Lisbon I talked with you on the phone about the rights of ALSes who did not sign the MOU. You said, that there is no difference concerning voting rights in comparison to those who signed it. After our talk you wrote on the list: "At the present time, NO LIMITATIONS ON NON-SIGNING ALSes HAVE BEEN PROPOSED OR AGREED. Therefore, ALL ALSes IN EUROPE HAVE FULL RIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE EURALO. There has been some question about this raised in previous emails. I hope this reinforces that there is nothing to worry about." Based on your mail, all accredited ALSes could expect to have voting rights without limitations. But according to your latest mail it seems that restrictions occured to those who did not sign and voting rights have been limited to MOU signers - except they would sign within the next two days. How can you expect that volunteer representatives of our ALSes can meet such short term deadlines? So, if inbetween your two eMails (mentioned above) limitations on rights of ALSes have been introduced: what changes exactly were made? why? when? by whom? Best Annette

3 2

Re: [EURO-Discuss] Nominees, country of origin and residence
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Corrected - the provision requires different countries of principal residence and different nationalities, so it would have no impact upon your candidature :) On 08/05/07, karen banks <karenb(a)gn.apc.org> wrote: > hi nick > > for purposes of accuracy, i am actually an australian national - but > am permanent resident of the UK and have been for over 20 years.. > > i'm not sure if this makes a difference or not > > karen > > At 19:39 08/05/2007, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: > >Dear colleagues: > > > >I have updated the nominations page to show the nominees, the country > >of residence and nationality, and the other factors relevant to being > >selected. > > > >For example, the Bylaws provide that the first five board seats must > >be individuals from different countries. This could make the selection > >process simpler, as there are 12 candidates and some of them are > >residents or nationals of the same country, whilst others are not. > > > >Could you all look at this, and if information is missing, fill it in? > >SOme might also be incorrect; you can fix that too. > > > >Thanks to Sebastian for pointing that this might make a consensus > >decision easier and for helping provide much of the information now on > >the page. > > > >The page once again is: > >https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 > >-- > >Regards, > > > >Nick Ashton-Hart > >PO Box 32160 > >London N4 2XY > >United Kingdom > >UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 > >USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > >Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 > >mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 > >Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / > >Skype: nashtonhart > >Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > > >_______________________________________________ > >EURO-Discuss mailing list > >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] Nominees, country of origin and residence
by karen banks May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

hi nick for purposes of accuracy, i am actually an australian national - but am permanent resident of the UK and have been for over 20 years.. i'm not sure if this makes a difference or not karen At 19:39 08/05/2007, Nick Ashton-Hart wrote: >Dear colleagues: > >I have updated the nominations page to show the nominees, the country >of residence and nationality, and the other factors relevant to being >selected. > >For example, the Bylaws provide that the first five board seats must >be individuals from different countries. This could make the selection >process simpler, as there are 12 candidates and some of them are >residents or nationals of the same country, whilst others are not. > >Could you all look at this, and if information is missing, fill it in? >SOme might also be incorrect; you can fix that too. > >Thanks to Sebastian for pointing that this might make a consensus >decision easier and for helping provide much of the information now on >the page. > >The page once again is: >https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 >-- >Regards, > >Nick Ashton-Hart >PO Box 32160 >London N4 2XY >United Kingdom >UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 >USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 >Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 >mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 >Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / >Skype: nashtonhart >Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > >_______________________________________________ >EURO-Discuss mailing list >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.…

1 0

Nominees, country of origin and residence
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Dear colleagues: I have updated the nominations page to show the nominees, the country of residence and nationality, and the other factors relevant to being selected. For example, the Bylaws provide that the first five board seats must be individuals from different countries. This could make the selection process simpler, as there are 12 candidates and some of them are residents or nationals of the same country, whilst others are not. Could you all look at this, and if information is missing, fill it in? SOme might also be incorrect; you can fix that too. Thanks to Sebastian for pointing that this might make a consensus decision easier and for helping provide much of the information now on the page. The page once again is: https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?euralo_elections_2007 -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] {Spam?}
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

That is true - I hope that my various emails made clear the 'strong recommendation' nature of the outcomes of the teleconference. On 08/05/07, "Kleinwächter"@smtp01.icann.org <"Kleinwächter"@smtp01.icann.org> wrote: > Just for clarification. > > My memory tells me that the telephone conference last Friday did not make "decisions" but formulated "strong recommendations". Each recognized ALS is a sovereign entity and has the right to veto or opt out. The problem is that obviously we have a fundamental problem to find consensus over procedures. > > Insofar we have to go through the painful continuation of the debate to look for a compromise which reflects the divided reality in the EURALO in a fair and balanced way. It is certainly against the rule if from about 20 recognized units only seven units take part in a telephone conference and claim this as the "final word". > > While I am in favour of moving forward fast, we should not do it at any price. We had no EURALO Board and elected European ALAC members for four years. It would not be a desaster, if we wait another two or six months to streamline our conflicts and to cerate the necessary confidence for a frutiful cooperation if it comes to substance. > > Best regards > > Wolfgang > > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Firstly, thanks very much for the comments; as you know this decision is up to the signers of the MoU to make. I'm sure that they will take on board your thoughts. Just to be completely clear though, Communica.ch is not at present an accredited ALS, so whether or not you were willing to become a party to the MoU, at the present time your organisation would not be eligible until the status of your application is dealt with, which is as I understand it pending either: 1) Amendment of your Bylaws, or; 2) the adoption of the applications criteria evaluation process which the ALAC is to decide one way or the other later today. After either or both of these events your application could be voted on by ALAC. On 08/05/07, Wolf Ludwig <wolf.ludwig(a)comunica-ch.net> wrote: > Dear Nick, > > some weeks ago, I think shortly after Lisbon, I expressed my willingness to sign the MoU > -- but our application is still pending (because we have to do formal modifications in > our bylaws to meet the requirements -- what we can provide already in fact, but bylaw > modifications are taking time as we only have one general assembly a year!). > > As far as I know, there are several confirmed ALS which have internal democratic > consultation and decision-making processes prior to come up with an external > obligation (such as signing a MoU etc.) Some of those ALS are mere volunteer > organisations and decent democratic processes are thereby taking time, as we know. > > Therefore I find it somehow inappropriate "to punish" those small volunteer orgs. by > restricting their voting rights in this start-up process for creating a first EURALO board. > Even if it may be an option in the MoU, as it was quoted, it doesn't make sense to me > under the given circumstances. We shouldn't start EURALO as a two-classes society > or as a regional structure of different speeds. I think we need other political signals > and encouragements for a vivid EURALO future! > > Regards, > Wolf > > Nick Ashton-Hart wrote Tue, 8 May 2007 11:45: > >See below: > > > >On 08/05/07, Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg(a)web.de> wrote: > >> Dear Nick, > >> > >> You just wrote: > >> "Whilst no impediment to participating in the work of the organisation > >> is otherwise envisaged, it was strongly felt that only ALSes who are a > >> party to the MoU with ICANN should cast votes in the upcoming election." > >> > >> It is hard to understand the deeper significance of this sentence, > >> especially for non-native english speakers. > >> > > > >A thousand pardons - that is a rather unfortunate sentence. > > > >To clarify: > > > >On the teleconference, it was unanimously expressed that only ALSes > >who had signed the MoU prior to the vote should be eligible to vote. > > > >> After Lisbon I talked with you on the phone about the rights of ALSes > >> who did not sign the MOU. You said, that there is no difference > >> concerning voting rights in comparison to those who signed it. > >> > >> After our talk you wrote on the list: > >> "At the present time, NO LIMITATIONS ON NON-SIGNING ALSes HAVE BEEN > >> PROPOSED OR AGREED. Therefore, ALL ALSes IN EUROPE HAVE FULL RIGHTS TO > >> PARTICIPATE IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE EURALO. There has been some question > >> about this raised in previous emails. I hope this reinforces that there > >> is nothing to worry about." > >> > >> Based on your mail, all accredited ALSes could expect to have voting > >> rights without limitations. But according to your latest mail it seems > >> that restrictions occured to those who did not sign and voting rights > >> have been limited to MOU signers - except they would sign within the > >> next two days. > >> How can you expect that volunteer representatives of our ALSes can meet > >> such short term deadlines? > >> > >> So, if inbetween your two eMails (mentioned above) limitations on rights > >> of ALSes have been introduced: what changes exactly were made? why? > >> when? by whom? > >> > > > >As mentioned above, this was the unanimous view of those participating > >on the teleconference on 4th May. > > > >I remember our call, and also my email on the subject, but please > >remember: the MoU always provided for the ability of the signing > >organisations to limit certain aspects of participation by non-signing > >organisations. > > > >This was put in not really in relation to the current ALSes but > >because in the future, there will be entirely new ALSes, and those who > >are a part of the MoU may wish to require them to 'sign up' to the MoU > >in order to participate in some ways. Equally, signers may not care to > >impose any conditions - it was deliberately left flexible. > > > >As to the timeframe to sign up, it would be incorrect to say that they > >have only two days to make this decision. In truth, the MoU has been > >signed now for more than a month; those who had not yet indicated > >their digital signature could have done so at any time between the > >signing ceremony on 30th March to the present date. > > > >Please remember that these decisions are up to you and if you wish to > >object, you can object. > > > >That would I think delay the vote on the ALAC members and the board, > >which would be unfortunate; the signing organisations would then need > >to conduct a separate vote on whether or not non-signers could vote, > >and only after that vote could we then conduct the election. > > > >> Best > >> Annette > >> > > > > > >-- > >-- > >Regards, > > > >Nick Ashton-Hart > >PO Box 32160 > >London N4 2XY > >United Kingdom > >UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 > >USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 > >Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 > >mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 > >Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / > >Skype: nashtonhart > >Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart > > > >_______________________________________________ > >EURO-Discuss mailing list > >EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > >http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > > > > comunica-ch > phone +41 79 204 83 87 > www.comunica-ch.net > > _______________________________________________ > EURO-Discuss mailing list > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_atlarge-lists.… > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Re: [EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

See below: On 08/05/07, Annette Muehlberg <annette.muehlberg(a)web.de> wrote: > Dear Nick, > > You just wrote: > "Whilst no impediment to participating in the work of the organisation > is otherwise envisaged, it was strongly felt that only ALSes who are a > party to the MoU with ICANN should cast votes in the upcoming election." > > It is hard to understand the deeper significance of this sentence, > especially for non-native english speakers. > A thousand pardons - that is a rather unfortunate sentence. To clarify: On the teleconference, it was unanimously expressed that only ALSes who had signed the MoU prior to the vote should be eligible to vote. > After Lisbon I talked with you on the phone about the rights of ALSes > who did not sign the MOU. You said, that there is no difference > concerning voting rights in comparison to those who signed it. > > After our talk you wrote on the list: > "At the present time, NO LIMITATIONS ON NON-SIGNING ALSes HAVE BEEN > PROPOSED OR AGREED. Therefore, ALL ALSes IN EUROPE HAVE FULL RIGHTS TO > PARTICIPATE IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE EURALO. There has been some question > about this raised in previous emails. I hope this reinforces that there > is nothing to worry about." > > Based on your mail, all accredited ALSes could expect to have voting > rights without limitations. But according to your latest mail it seems > that restrictions occured to those who did not sign and voting rights > have been limited to MOU signers - except they would sign within the > next two days. > How can you expect that volunteer representatives of our ALSes can meet > such short term deadlines? > > So, if inbetween your two eMails (mentioned above) limitations on rights > of ALSes have been introduced: what changes exactly were made? why? > when? by whom? > As mentioned above, this was the unanimous view of those participating on the teleconference on 4th May. I remember our call, and also my email on the subject, but please remember: the MoU always provided for the ability of the signing organisations to limit certain aspects of participation by non-signing organisations. This was put in not really in relation to the current ALSes but because in the future, there will be entirely new ALSes, and those who are a part of the MoU may wish to require them to 'sign up' to the MoU in order to participate in some ways. Equally, signers may not care to impose any conditions - it was deliberately left flexible. As to the timeframe to sign up, it would be incorrect to say that they have only two days to make this decision. In truth, the MoU has been signed now for more than a month; those who had not yet indicated their digital signature could have done so at any time between the signing ceremony on 30th March to the present date. Please remember that these decisions are up to you and if you wish to object, you can object. That would I think delay the vote on the ALAC members and the board, which would be unfortunate; the signing organisations would then need to conduct a separate vote on whether or not non-signers could vote, and only after that vote could we then conduct the election. > Best > Annette > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

2 1

Re: [EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

That is exactly the case. The provisions were meant to be flexible though - if those who signed decided to let those who do not sign - now or in the future - vote, then nothing stops the signatories from decididng to allow that. The reverse is also the case. As to your point about whether the MoU has any impact on non-signers, you are of course correct that it only binds those who are a party to it. Note that these are two separate questions though. On 08/05/07, Roberto Gaetano <roberto(a)icann.org> wrote: > I don't know what was the past correspondence, and I assume that this is a > question that ultimately will end, for a change :<(, with the lawyers, but > my understanding since the beginning was that the relationship between ICANN > and EURALO, including the modus operandi of EURALO within ALAC, was going to > be governed by the MoU. > > As a matter of fact, re-reading the documents (AoA & MoU) I see that the > election of EURALO representatives is covered in articles 1.2.5 and 5.4.1 of > the MoU. I wonder how the MoU could extend legally to organizations like > ALSes that do not sign the MoU. Of course, in the beginning we all thought > of an MoU signed by EURALO with ICANN, and implicitely adopted by each ALS > by joining the EURALO, but since we went the road of individual signatures > for the MoU, by the same toke we must assume that the MoU takes force only > for the ALSes who have signed it, not for the others. Who, if they do not > want to sign, will remain unaffected by MoU obligations, but also unaffected > by MoU advantages. > > Where does this not make sense? > > Cheers, > Roberto > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: euro-discuss-bounces(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > [mailto:euro-discuss-bounces@atlarge-lists.icann.org] On > > Behalf Of Annette Muehlberg > > Sent: 08 May 2007 12:11 > > To: Nick Ashton-Hart ICANN > > Cc: EURALO Discussion > > Subject: [EURO-Discuss] transparency on changes of rules > > > > Dear Nick, > > > > You just wrote: > > "Whilst no impediment to participating in the work of the > > organisation is otherwise envisaged, it was strongly felt > > that only ALSes who are a party to the MoU with ICANN should > > cast votes in the upcoming election." > > > > It is hard to understand the deeper significance of this > > sentence, especially for non-native english speakers. > > > > After Lisbon I talked with you on the phone about the rights > > of ALSes who did not sign the MOU. You said, that there is no > > difference concerning voting rights in comparison to those > > who signed it. > > > > After our talk you wrote on the list: > > "At the present time, NO LIMITATIONS ON NON-SIGNING ALSes > > HAVE BEEN PROPOSED OR AGREED. Therefore, ALL ALSes IN EUROPE > > HAVE FULL RIGHTS TO PARTICIPATE IN ALL ASPECTS OF THE EURALO. > > There has been some question about this raised in previous > > emails. I hope this reinforces that there is nothing to worry about." > > > > Based on your mail, all accredited ALSes could expect to have > > voting rights without limitations. But according to your > > latest mail it seems that restrictions occured to those who > > did not sign and voting rights have been limited to MOU > > signers - except they would sign within the next two days. > > How can you expect that volunteer representatives of our > > ALSes can meet such short term deadlines? > > > > So, if inbetween your two eMails (mentioned above) > > limitations on rights of ALSes have been introduced: what > > changes exactly were made? why? > > when? by whom? > > > > Best > > Annette > > > > _______________________________________________ > > EURO-Discuss mailing list > > EURO-Discuss(a)atlarge-lists.icann.org > > http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/euro-discuss_a > > tlarge-lists.icann.org > -- -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom UK Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011 USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0

Current List of MoU Signatories / Non-Signatories
by Nick Ashton-Hart May 8, 2007

May 8, 2007

Dear All: This has been updated to reflect one error (ISOC Bulgaria in both lists), and the new addition of DVD to the list of signers https://st.icann.org/euralo/index.cgi?mou_signatories --- Current ALS parties to the MoU of ICANN, signed 29th March 2007 in person, or who have signed electronically afterwards: Suomen Internet-yhdistys ry. (ISOC Finland) Internet Society - Bulgaria Medienstadt Leipzig e.V. Internet Society Belgium Internet Society Luxembourg Chapitre français de l’Internet Society – ISOC France Società Internet ISOC CAT (CATALAN CHAPTER) Humanistische Union e.V. (German Civil Liberties Union) Netzwerk Neue Medien (nnm) Komitee Fur Eine Demokratische UNO (Committee For A Democratic United Nations) Deutsche Vereinigung für Datenschutz (DVD) e.V. List of Accredited ALSes Who Have Not Become a Party to the MoU Terre des Femmes E.v. FIfF IIAV FoeBud e.V. ISOC NL FITUG -- Regards, Nick Ashton-Hart Director, At-Large ICANN PO Box 32160 London N4 2XY United Kingdom Main Tel: +44 (20) 8800-1011] USA Tel: +1 (202) 657-5460 Fax: +44 (20) 7681-3135 mobile: +44 (7774) 932798 email: nick.ashton-hart(a)icann.org Win IM: ashtonhart(a)hotmail.com / AIM/iSight: nashtonhart(a)mac.com / Skype: nashtonhart Online Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ashtonhart

1 0