Re: [ga] Re: New TLD Evaluation Process : Specific Question to the Board

["J-F C. (Jefsey) Morfin" <jefsey@club-internet.fr>]

I am confused here.
Would you mean that to proprely advise the Board, the NTEPPTF had not to 
get real facts, and was not interested either? Or do I read you wrong?
jfc


At 19:21 02/09/02, M. Stuart Lynn wrote:
>There is confusion in the question and some of the subsequent responses.
>The appendices to which you refer have relevance to the evaluation itself 
>not to the NTEPPTF report. The latter is not an evaluation, but contains 
>recommendations to the board on how to proceed with an evaluation. The 
>task force did not require access to these appendices or any other similar 
>information in order to frame its recommendations.
>Stuart
>
>At 3:25 PM +0100 9/1/02, Richard Henderson wrote:
>>Why hasn't the NTEPPTF had access to the "Proof of Concept Evaluation 
>>reports" which had to be submitted by Afilias, in accordance with 
>>Appendix U of the .info Agreement with ICANN?
>>
>>This task force was specifically set up by the Board to Evaluate the New 
>>TLDs. How can it have done so without access to the vital data?
>>Has this data been fully submitted by Afilias?
>>Where is it?
>>Why hasn't it been provided, even to the Task Force set up to evaluate 
>>it? I have had it confirmed to me by members of this Task Force that 
>>these documents have not been provided to them.
>>Will Stuart Lynn now please confirm that all the documents have been 
>>properly submitted, and will the NTEPPTF please now reconvene and submit 
>>a revised report based on this data?
>>And will the ICANN Board please make this data available for others too, 
>>as specifically allowed under the terms of Appendix U?
>>What is the point of a "proof of concept" or an evaluation process if you 
>>withhold the vital data from the Registries involved?
>>It makes it seem like the Board wants to "go through the motions" without 
>>having to address all the details.
>>Richard Henderson