Re: [ga] gTLD Constituency

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler-dompol@iodesign.com>]

> Let's be clear, however, that merely making an application does not mean 
> that the applicant has any experience as a registry.  Some do, some 
> don't.  So calling an applicant a registry, just because they have made an 
> application is really identical to calling someone a citizen just because 
> they applied for citizenship.

If they're not qualified, they should have been turned down by ICANN.
Since they were not, take it up with the board.

> ps.  For all your preference in ad hominems, Chris, I notice the you 
> ignored my observation that my position on where to draw the membership 
> line is not consistent with what you would expect to be my client's 
> preference.  Oops.

No oops. I didn't choose to point out the obvious. I guess you're asking
me to. Your client has a vested interest in ensuring the stability of ICANN
and that there are no threats to that stability. Hence your tactics of diversion
and avoiding issues that are troublesome to ICANN. Your client has
a vested interest in preventing new competition, hence your position of
not allowing applicants in the constituency.

I would have thought this obvious.

Christopher

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html