Re: [wg-c] current version of WG-C report

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

Jon,

I suggest just characterizing the public comment as supporting Position
Paper E, a specific instance of Position Papers D and A, unless you are
of the opinion that Position Papers D and A can't take on specific form.

Calling it a different issue is just revisiting the position first
argued by Milt, then his chorus, that no proper action can be specific
first and generalized subsequent, but only considered in WG-C in the
general case, formalized into some "objective criteria", then applied
with no further discretionary ICANN participation.

Please don't go down the road that "nothing can be known, the market
forces will answer everything".

In the final para please note that some members of the WG oppose the
proposition that the selection mechanism should exclude the ICANN
Board, or the United States from originating  new gTLD proposals.

Two modest changes.

Cheers,
Eric