Bob, There are no "two proposals" of anything. The July 03 ballot did not change RC ballot process. Historically, the authors of three motions that appeared on that ballot might have been smarter and eliminated two of the motions so as to change the RC ballot process. Your proposed ballot is misleading and should read simply "Bob wants to change the RC ballot process", some details you think support your desire, and the existing and your proposed texts of the controlling RC document. I want every position of NSI (NASDEQ:NSOL), Register (NASDEQ:RCOM), TUCOWS (NASDEC:TCOW), ... on every issue of substance that provides "input", no matter how illusory the fiction of "input to the ICANN process" is, to be open and on the RC record. This is a body constituted under ICANN's original "constituency" model, nominally affecting the regulation of all issues that come before the board of directors of a 501(c)(3) domiciled in California. This isn't a small town in Vermont where the bars are closed on the first Tuesday in November, and no one talks about politics on Sunday, candidates are too dignified to try and pursuade voters and no one breaks the law. At this point, if Tim wants to ask someone to share the work of the ExCom, that beats having a broken election. Eric