hi,

i phrased in wrongly.

i was arguing that there were members of NCSG who did have interest.  Though it was not so much that members like me or you had interest but that there were non-profit institutions that had the interest.  And while I had spoken privately to some who had such interest, I was not sure that any had made that sort of interest public.  And since at that point I had Eric shouting me down saying that .ngo had no real backing, I got insecure.  I was grateful for the confirmation I got on the list.


a.

On 22 Jul 2010, at 05:59, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> Avri, 
> sorry to respond slowly, was traveling all day Tuesday 
> I am part of NCSG and I am a big supporter of SRSU. 
> Did you phrase the statement below correctly? Are you arguing that NCSG members have NO interest in SRSU or the opposite? 
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: NCSG-NCUC [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Avri Doria [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 10:56 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [NCSG-NCUC-DISCUSS] Single Registrant TLD
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Just checking.
> 
> The contention by some on the VIWG has been that I am deluded when I argue that the NCSG, especially some of its institutional members have no interest in seeing Single Registrant TLD (.ngo for want of a better name) where the names could be distributed internally, without use of a registrar, to employees or members.
> 
> Can anyone confirm my delusion?  Are their institutional members who think this sort of thing should exist - even if their name in not a famous brand?
> 
> thanks
> 
> a.