Good point, Jorge, I think what Avri meant was that an objection to those strings had been lodged. Avri, can you clarify quickly? 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
> Of Jorge Amodio
> Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 3:54 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC comments - and a note on support for
> diversity of views in our community
> 
> Forgive my ignorance or I may have missed something but I don't think that
> there is any string from the first new gTLD batch in the "dispute resolution"
> stage yet, afaik that comes after the evaluation results, isn't it ?
> 
> -Jorge
> 
> On May 13, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> 
> > Folks:
> >
> > The edited version of the draft is at:
> > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d6GT0zqLjU6e7Js-TE2Gjlm_-
> B5xvhE5CrRPZSV3oV4/edit
> >
> > As a compromise to the few objections on the earlier drafts, the current
> version states it does not take a position on the amazon and patagonia
> applications.  (Remember we are not commenting on individual applications
> in this stmt, we are commenting on GAC process).
> >
> > The deadline for NCSG filing these comments is tomorrow so I will be filing
> them in 24 hours unless there are any other strong objections.   Thanks to
> Milton and others for all the redrafting and compromising to get a statement
> we can submit as a group.
> 
> >
> > Thank you,
> > Robin
> >