April 12, 2007
12:23 p.m.
Wendy Seltzer wrote:
It's a way for individuals to exert pressure on ICANN, not on the RALO. Then this provision has no place in a document governing the RALO.
The provision would have no effect on the day-to-day functioning of the collection of ALSs, but gives individuals (and ALSs) recourse when ICANN screws up. That recourse exists whether it's granted to them by the RALO or not.
Where's the possible harm?
Lack. Of. Focus. - Evan