Robin Gross wrote: > ICANN staff has (again) thrown out the consensus of the community in the Re= > c6 Working Group on Morality & Public Order of new gtlds and decided to ins= > titute its own policy - one concerned only with "risk management" to ICANN = > (i.e. cheap insurance & lawsuits). So all of the important public interest= > points that NCSG and ALAC were able to get into the policy have been unila= > terally thrown out by staff. Even Leibovitch from ALAC has written a good = > summarization of this tragedy - see below. We'll need to dust-off the ca= > mpaign equipment on this issue. It is huge: a gigantic power grab by ICAN= > N policy staff against the entire community. So, does the EC have a recommendation about where we go from here? I would expect that NCSG has strong common interests with ALAC here and should work closely with them on formulting a response. I don't recall any significant disagerement amongst NSCG members on the inappropriateness of the MAPO provisions as originally statyed and therefore as now imposed by the ICANN staff. Given that, it's a matter of process rather than message that we need to decide and given that it would probably be easiuer for the EC to make a proposal in consultation with ALAC. I want to help but am not sure what the best action is to help. -- Professor Andrew A Adams [log in to unmask] Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/