Danny, An isolated note:

When I consider the history of ICANN and its various constructs I note that ICANN has certainly terminated some of its constituenct elements before (the PSO is gone ...

I think the better characterization of the circa 2002 bylaws change is none of the circa 1998 organizations, IETF, W3C, ETSI, wanted to continue the PSO. There is even some discussion of this resulting from my comments on the absence of a formal, and vote originating means for organizations with technical briefs to affect board composition, and therefore, board votes on issues eventually affecting policy on technical matters, in the Berkman contribution to the structural review last year. I wouldn't lump it with some eliminate the non-functioning, but consider it as the divorce of the marriage of convenience between the IESG/IETF and the early "New Entity" founders. If you're interested in the trajectory from member selecting to liaison appointing let me know next week when I'm back in Monterey or Ithaca. The Berkman people did a good job on that bit of history. Anyway, I've no skin in the game, I'm here by accident and the policy thingee I can point to and say I'd something to do with it, is what happened after the ALAC presentation to the GAC, which was flawed by a "join our group" message, and which somewhat abruptly lurched into intimate consultation and a joint text the substance of which I made a contribution to, but as of Friday I've not actually seen. Just what policy areas are you intrested in? My son likes to video and I've been carrying a flip camera with me all week. If I knew what you or anyone wanted to see the video from (delayed until I get home for b/w reasons if nothing else) I'd have turned the camera on. Eric