NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text 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:
From:
Carl Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Carl Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 5 Feb 2013 15:22:42 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (30 lines)
Avri,

This sting is on one of my security blocks.  So I have not accessed.  
However, I will support your opinion.  I do ask that you use digression 
as I don't like the idea of generics being licensed as a general rule.  
I would too, like more discussion with specifics posted here.

Lou

On 2/5/2013 2:40 PM, Avri Doria wrote:
> Hi,
>
> An issue I expect this group is as mixed on as anyone else.
>
> I am among those who see no problem as I do not think it affects the code of conduct.
>
> And we have others who see it as a great problem and who are leading the campaign against closed generics.
>
> Might be worth having an extended NCSG-Discuss on it
>
> avri
>
> On 5 Feb 2013, at 13:18, William Drake wrote:
>
>> surprise!
>>
>> http://www.thedomains.com/2013/02/05/icann-new-gtld-committee-not-sure-how-to-handle-closed-generic-applications/
>>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2