I'm confused about what we are supporting and what we are not.

The first paragraph says "We support what we consider to be the core principle
underlying current policy, which is the continued functional and contractual
separation of registries and registrars".

The rest of the document while it talks about "ownership and marketing"  seems
to me that argues on keeping the separation but favoring cross-ownership.

Shouldn't we start making it clear what we interpret as "separation" and
"cross-ownership" ?

Also about point 3, I don't believe is a good tactic to say that we are in
"favor" because we are against of those who are "against", I believe we need
to use our own arguments and analysis without making any reference
to those who support or favor whatever it is.

As far as I remember in the past we discussed that there may be particular
situations where the burden of registry-registrar separation is
not necessary or required. Prime example .IBM using its own TLD for
its own infrastructure/biz without intentions to sell any names under that
gTLD, or a NGO not looking for profit by delegating 2nd level names under
its gTLD.

I agree that we made it clear last time that any changes in the current
policy should go through the PDP.

My .02

Regards
Jorge