Hi
I think the letter is good.
As for the amazon and patagonia statement, I think the way it is outlined is neutral in the sense to whether they ought to be approved or not - let the objections/replies run their course. Perhaps it can be even more neutral.
Perhaps adding a lead-in that say something like:
Without taking a position on the objections against .amazon and .patagonia which are in the dispute resolution process we criticize the GAC communique on this subject because of ...
avri
On 10 May 2013, at 07:01, Milton L Mueller wrote:
We are not commenting on the Amazon or Patagonia applications. We are commenting on the GAC advice.
I can add a line stating that many organizations from LA oppose the applications, but the point about the GAC acting extra-legally _must_ be made if we are to be taken seriously as a principled voice.
-----Original Message-----
From: NCSG-Discuss [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Flávio Rech Wagner
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 9:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [NCSG-Discuss] GAC comments - and a note on my rhetorical
excesses
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_-B5xvh
E5CrRPZSV3oV4/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.