-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Hi Milton - thanks for initiating a comment on this.
Overall, I don't support this draft statement, particularly the human
rights analysis. I think there are some good elements to the GAC
advice that are actually rights affirming (for example, in relation to
community applications, the relatively small number of objections and
some other points).
While I agree that there are some serious issues with other aspects,
overall I think the draft comment really strikes the wrong tone and
won't be persuasive. I don't have the bandwidth to look at this in
detail until later this week, sorry, but in the meantime I think:
1. Get rid of the whole preamble and all the paras on GAC and the
multi-stakeholder process. it doesn't add anything substantive to the
specific advice comments.
2. On the preamble - the first para made no sense to me: how does
asking for HR principles to be abided by make a mockery of HR? suggest
you make it clearer.
3. the rhetorical questions - some good, some problematic - I could
help try to come up with some better ones.
4. Second half is better
5. I don't agree with the statements on closed generics - and if we
don't have a shared NCSG position i think better to leave out or
submit as personal comments together with those who want to sign on.

Joy


On 6/05/2013 7:35 a.m., Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Dear all I have gotten a good start on some comments on the GAC
> Beijing communique. Some of you may not yet appreciate how
> significant it is for the board to ask for public comment on a GAC
> advice. In this case, it seems that the GAC has really overstepped
> its bounds, and if you read my comment draft you will get a better
> idea why I think so. A strong response from the ICANN "community"
> will help overcome this subversive document.
> 
> I would very much like to see the NCSG as a whole speak with a
> unified voice on this topic.
> 
> Take a look at this URL. 
> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d6GT0zqLjU6e7Js-TE2Gjlm_-B5xvhE5CrRPZSV3oV4/edit?usp=sharing
> 
> 
> At this stage, I would refrain from making direct edits in the
> text, but do make comments regarding the text. We can also discuss
> and debate on the NCSG list. I have the GAC advice downloaded so do
> not have a link for it. If someone else can quickly supply one
> please do so, otherwise I will dig it up in a day or two.
> 
> Milton L. Mueller Professor, Syracuse University School of
> Information Studies Internet Governance Project 
> http://blog.internetgovernance.org
> 
> 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRhuirAAoJEA9zUGgfM+bqt4EIAIOLGJewjzQxG7gLYzDi3xqd
tyR3RUx+GwdgWCl04+Fz7Ab4Lb2IdqnuB7wWYahtvemFdCts0Y3kHh1c/KNLftVt
Vqq41fJKC76pwjgbnnmWd1vviH2Zt1dU6twjxK0NKetY87aDDv4c8cIm3D0C9V8G
9fQBGb+U752ylzuIiu5RqItS5TuNOcXfD1s5k2h+q1cns73J/TI1KzCjkCWh5Qhi
Hg33pwAI1NwrXK5NmDlT3QN25owZhw40QlQ9TWC4MBFqjSUSKD4jUndrsO6MUkph
RXs0N/+pfr+0LGK8Qjs2lwH8xVGb4R/OPTqvVDAJXXYyUWp6sO30/mhCdxrRDOs=
=ogf1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----