Milton L Mueller wrote:
> Hi, it would be nice to know more about what the rationale for this position is. Not that I oppose it, it's just that the EoI proposal has been kicking around since October and no one here has expressed any positions on it or interest in it. Obviously you had a discussed there, please let us know what you mean by a "pre-launch application" and I'd especially like to know how you respond to one of the arguments I have heard in favor of the EoI proposal: 
> - it provides information about what is really out there, thus providing a counter to GAC and TM-lobby promoted FUD about all the problems a new TLD round is likely to cause 

When the EoI becomes a mandatory declaration of intent to participate,
combined with a serious financial commitment, without greater clarity of
process from the ICANN side, it seems unfair to many who would like to
participate.  I'd rather channel that energy back into advancement of
the actual gTLD introduction.

--Wendy


> ________________________________________
> From: Non-Commercial User Constituency [[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Wendy Seltzer [[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 09, 2010 7:27 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: [NCUC-DISCUSS] NCSG statement on the EoI
> 
> The assembled NCSG in Nairobi agreed to endorse this statement regarding
> Expressions of Interest:
> 
> As it has been described here, the "Expression of Interest" is in fact a
> "Pre-Launch Application" before ICANN is willing to make contractual
> promises. The NCSG does not support a Pre-Launch Application under these
> circumstances.
> 
> --Wendy
>