All, I too would like to know the source of this. I did not reference it in my comments. But true or not the overall problem exists. I am focused on the overall problem, which should have been clear at the start of the new-gTLD program. I had already written about the overall problem in my blog on .health several months ago. Sam On 18/03/2015 2:37 PM, Amr Elsadr wrote: > Hi, > > On Mar 18, 2015, at 3:11 PM, Seun Ojedeji <[log in to unmask] > <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: > >> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 1:39 PM, Sam Lanfranco<[log in to unmask] >> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>wrote: >> >> On 18/03/2015 7:56 AM, Timothe Litt wrote: >>> Doctor, doctor give me the news: >>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/03/15/icann_doctors/ >>> Sigh. >> >> What I do not understand is why ICANN could not see these >> problems coming from the start. >> >> >> Before i add a strong +1 to this, i quote the intro of the article below: >> >> Domain-name overseer ICANN has decided that only one kind of >> doctor may be allowed online – and that is a medical doctor. In >> a*decision*made late last month. >> >> >> Could someone kindly refer me to where i can find that decision >> statement? > > I did a quick search on recent board resolutions, and actually > couldn’t find anything. In fact, according to the published activity > of the ICANN board, this was discussed during a meeting on February > 12th, but no resolution seems to have been taken. > > https://www.icann.org/resources/board-material/resolutions-new-gtld-2015-02-12-en > > I would also like to see a resolution and rationale on this. > > Thanks. > > Amr -- ------------------------------------------------ "It is a disgrace to be rich and honoured in an unjust state" -Confucius ------------------------------------------------ Dr Sam Lanfranco (Prof Emeritus & Senior Scholar) Econ, York U., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA - M3J 1P3 email: [log in to unmask] Skype: slanfranco blog: http://samlanfranco.blogspot.com Phone: +1 613-476-0429 cell: +1 416-816-2852