Good point, Jorge, I think what Avri meant was that an objection to those strings had been lodged. Avri, can you clarify quickly? > -----Original Message----- > From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf > Of Jorge Amodio > Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 3:54 PM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC comments - and a note on support for > diversity of views in our community > > Forgive my ignorance or I may have missed something but I don't think that > there is any string from the first new gTLD batch in the "dispute resolution" > stage yet, afaik that comes after the evaluation results, isn't it ? > > -Jorge > > On May 13, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Robin Gross <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > Folks: > > > > The edited version of the draft is at: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1d6GT0zqLjU6e7Js-TE2Gjlm_- > B5xvhE5CrRPZSV3oV4/edit > > > > As a compromise to the few objections on the earlier drafts, the current > version states it does not take a position on the amazon and patagonia > applications. (Remember we are not commenting on individual applications > in this stmt, we are commenting on GAC process). > > > > The deadline for NCSG filing these comments is tomorrow so I will be filing > them in 24 hours unless there are any other strong objections. Thanks to > Milton and others for all the redrafting and compromising to get a statement > we can submit as a group. > > > > > Thank you, > > Robin > >