> -----Original Message-----
> 
> If the EOI can't be started until everything is resolved,
> then why do you need an EOI?

My point exactly. We can be forced to "resolve issues" for the next century, especially when certain interest groups don't want to have a new TLD round at all, or want to protect incumbent interests (like, e.g., ccTLDs).

> It is not needed to resolve the scaling issue, utting names in in
> batches a ew at a time is going to resolve that it real time.  the

We both know there is no scaling issue, but at least an EoI would make it clear that we are dealing with, say X00 applications rather than X,000 or XX,0000 applications.

> i see it as yet another process that
> only achieves delay in the original process.


You could be right, that's a valid argument against it. I thought Wendy's point was good too. But I think you may need to clarify the NCUC statement that came out of your meeting to elaborate on these points. To many, it might look as if you are just supporting the GAC and other obstructionist interests. You need to make it clear that you are opposing EoI for the opposite reason.