AFAIK what was attached on Erick's email is not a GAC Communique ... -J On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:41 AM, David Cake <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > On 07/04/2013, at 1:40 PM, Jorge Amodio <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > > > Erick, > > > > declarations like this are worth not much in this process, what really > counts is serious studies and facts showing how the approval of such > applications will have a negative effect to the communities involved and > the Internet in general. > > > > The declaration of this, or that, here or there, being mindful, > recognizing, or citing organizations and meetings completely alien to ICANN > are totally useless, yes they help to bring up the point but they do not > provide a strong argument against the applications, bureaucratic government > verbiage is not part of the new gTLD process.Try again ... > > Jorge, perhaps you have a different impression of the GACs role > than I do. > The GACs role is in part to represent government policy, including > that made in other forums, such as Ministerial meetings, within ICANN. Or > to put it another way, the GAC ensures that bureaucratic government > verbiage is relevant to the new gTLD process (so supplement the > bureaucratic multi-stakeholder verbiage, which seems to be in more than > adequate supply). > > > > > The problem with these applications are not the strings but what > process/criteria will be used to evaluate applications for exclusive use > that include strings that represent regions that are not clearly defined or > listed on any international standards, since this will set a precedent for > future applications. > > And it appears that we have at least one answer in this round - > where cross-government geographic concerns do not fall within the remit of > a single government and otherwise fall through the geographic nomenclature > rules in the Applicant Guidebook, but that nevertheless cause concern to > governments, they can be brought up through the Independent Objector, who > has objected to these applications this time around. > > Regards > David > >