I asked for time to consult with my colleagues and have done so. We have no problem with Rafik being named Vice-Chair of the EPDP based on the following presumptions/conditions: 1. There is a direct conflict with Rafik acting as the first level handling of a complaint about a leadership decision (a Liaison responsibility) and serving in that leadership. If the GNSO Chair chooses to act in his place in that role (any complaint that stands would go to the Chair next in any case), or to appoint someone else who is will be closely following the proceedings (and agrees not to launch a compliant!), the conflict goes away. 2. Our assumption is that the role of Vice-Chair will be purely to on occasion act as the Chair of a meeting when Kurt is not available, or to handle other administrative tasks. In this case, we see no conflict. If, on the other hand, he and Kurt would take on the role that other Chairs/Co-Chairs/Vice-Chairs teams have and strategize on to how to overcome conflicts or impasses within the work team, then there is a direct conflict as it puts one of the EPDP constituent groups in a privileged position. Although Rafik is not one of the formal members of the NCSG contingent on the EPDP, as a possible incoming NCSG Chair and a key member of the NCSG Policy Committee, he cannot disassociate himself completely from being involved. Alan