Re: [wg-c] Respecting the process

[Elisabeth Porteneuve <Elisabeth.Porteneuve@cetp.ipsl.fr>]

Kent, Milton et al,

You are correct, it is not appropriate to keep the NSI proposal
on the dnso.org main page, and it has been removed by now.
I appologize for my mistake. It is recorded in the council list
archives, like any other Contituencies proposals.

Elisabeth Porteneuve

> 
> [...]
>  
> > Who made the decision to post that? Why? What gives Roger Cochetti, a
> > spokesman for the incumbent monopolist, the right to a privileged
> > platform to promote unreviewed and self-serving gTLD proposals?
> 
> About this issue, I agree with you.  I fully support Mr Cochetti and
> NSI's right to make proposals, and there is much that I like in the NSI
> proposal.  But you are correct -- the placement on the web page does
> give it an undeserved prominence.  I think it is a good idea to post
> proposals like that, and I think there should be a place on the DNSO web 
> site for them, but the current situation is clearly not the way it 
> should be.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
> kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain
>