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:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 10 May 2013 11:01:01 +0000
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (109 lines)
We are not commenting on the Amazon or Patagonia applications. We are commenting on the GAC advice.
I can add a line stating that many organizations from LA oppose the applications, but the point about the GAC acting extra-legally _must_ be made if we are to be taken seriously as a principled voice. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
> Flávio Rech Wagner
> Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 9:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC comments - and a note on my rhetorical
> excesses
> 
> I haven't seen any statements from civil society organizations from
> South America supporting the approval of the .amazon and .patagonia
> applications. Exact on the contrary. Civil society in South America is
> definitely against the approval of these applications, as you can see,
> for example, from the list of organizations signing the document sent by
> Carlos Afonso in a previous message. Let's stop assuming that this is
> just a matter of governments and "empty political statements".
> 
> In a few cases, governments may reflect the position of the civil
> society ...
> 
> Regards
> 
> Flavio
> 
> 
> > I've not seen yet any valid argument or study from the Argentinean
> > government why .patagonia should not be approved, not that I'm in
> > favor but claiming ownership or sovereignty with empty political
> > statements IMHO has no weight in the evaluation process and the
> > board can disregard the GAC advice.
> >
> >  I agree with Milton that because government X say so is not a solid
> > argument to deny an application.
> >
> > -Jorge
> >
> > On May 9, 2013, at 4:01 PM, "Carlos A. Afonso" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> While I agree with most of the doc, I do not agree (along with many
> >> civil society orgs & movements) with the arguments in the paragraph
> >> mentioning .amazon and .patagonia. Please leave these arguments to
> >> the commercial interest groups.
> >>
> >> fraternal regards
> >>
> >> --c.a.
> >>
> >> sent from a dumbphone
> >>
> >> On 9 May 2013, at 14:18, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I agree.  These are solid comments and NCSG should endorse them.
> >>>
> >>> Thanks very much, Milton, for the difficult work of drafting and
> >>> re-drafting to incorporate the views of others.
> >>>
> >>> Best,
> >>> Robin
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On May 9, 2013, at 10:49 AM, McTim wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Thu, May 9, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Milton L Mueller <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>>>> Today in domain incite the writer starts his blog post with:
> >>>>> " For the last few weeks I've been attempting to write a
> >>>>> sensible analysis of the Governmental Advisory Committee's
> >>>>> advice on new gTLDs without resorting to incredulity, hyperbole
> >>>>> or sarcasm"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Exactly what I felt when I took on the task!!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So it took him a few weeks to work it out of his system. Can you
> >>>>> all forgive me - or perhaps respect me - for taking only one week?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I have revised the GAC comments. They are tamer. They eliminated
> >>>>>  one mistake that Kathy pointed out to me. the bow to division
> >>>>> within NCSG regarding closed generics. But they still drive home
> >>>>> what are absolutely essential points that MUST be made, and made
> >>>>> strongly, in this important comment period. Please take a fresh
> >>>>> look.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d6GT0zqLjU6e7Js-TE2Gjlm_-B5xvh
> >>>>> E5CrRPZSV3oV4/edit?usp=sharing
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I am happy with the re-write in terms of tone and substance.
> >>>>
> >>>> It is important that we make a solid statement about this to the
> >>>> Board, as it gives them political "cover" to say no to the GAC.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Cheers,
> >>>>
> >>>> McTim
> >>>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is.
> >>>>  A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> >>>
> >
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2