Sorry Milton, I disagree with the tone and tenor of the comments.  I 
think the GAC is many things, but not ignorant. This same phrase got 
many people upset when used against us for disagreeing with others in 
this constituency.  Also many of us opposed Closed Generics and the GAC 
has taken a strong stand on this that, frankly, I support -- and the GAC 
stance supports the vast majority of the community.

Not sure of how to proceed from here, but overall, I find some sections 
of the GAC right on target, and others far from it (the latter being the 
Whois comments, for example).  So I would not shoot the whole thing.

Best,
Kathy
:
> 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