It renders well the idea that the merits of having a review process are conceptually independent from the merits of various policy positions that may or may not be articulated during such a process.

It makes an elegant case for (more) evidence-based policy-making. It ties it to good governance and already existing processes.

I'm happy to support this and i thank the authors for their good work and precious time.

Nicolas

On 7/13/2011 4:48 PM, Joly MacFie wrote:

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
From Danny Younger:

There is one line in the Statement, however, which is inaccurate -- namely the claim that the UDRP has not been previously reviewed. From 2001 to 2003, a review of the UDRP was conducted by the DNSO. This "UDRP Review and Evaluation" continued until the Chair of the Task Force (the IPC's J. Scott Evans) resigned under mysterious circumstances -- see

http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-udrp/Arc00/msg00575.html

--
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joly MacFie 218 565 9365 Skype:punkcast
WWWhatsup NYC - http://wwwhatsup.com
http://pinstand.com - http://punkcast.com
VP (Admin) - ISOC-NY - http://isoc-ny.org
--------------------------------------------------------------
-