NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
Re: Open letter to ICANN from the Legal Counsels of intergovernmental organizations
From:
McTim <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
McTim <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 19 Dec 2011 16:01:30 +0300
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (572 bytes) , text/html (954 bytes) 
On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Avri Doria <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On 19 Dec 2011, at 03:10, David Cake wrote:
>
> >       The GNSO should absolutely not throw this issue in with RC and IOC
> issues IMO, and should come out fairly strongly against this idea that the
> Reserved Name should be expanded on a general public interest idea.
>
>
> Why not? Aren't they all similar/equivalent as either good or bad ideas?
>

yes, all equivalently bad ideas IMHO.


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route
indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

ATOM RSS1 RSS2