<html><head><style type="text/css"><!-- DIV {margin:0px;} --></style></head><body><div style="font-family:times new roman, new york, times, serif;font-size:12pt"><DIV>Mark,</DIV>
<DIV> If you are collecting comments (as solicited by ICANN) on the GNSO restructuring proposal, I have one. Currently the "houses" are termed "contracted parties" and "non-contracted parties" as place holders for possibly better names. I do not favor this terminology because it implies that the "contracted" parties house can only consist of registry and registrar constituencies. The Board in its discussion has raised the issue of new constituencies and I am in favor of it when it makes sense. I am *not* in favor of having all new constituencies necessarily becoming part of our house. I believe that those who make money from the domain space (e.g. "domainers") should be put in the other house - let them deal with them.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>My two cents,</DIV>
<DIV>Greg</DIV></div><br>
</body></html>