Hi All, As we move towards a common denominator, I support not including anything in the statement about .amazon and .patagonia (just as Milton has graciously agreed not to include anything on closed generics). Best, Kathy : > 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_-B5xvhE5CrRPZSV3oV4/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.