ICANN ICANN Email List Archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Fwd: [gnso-contro-wg] final draft 05

  • To: Controversial TLDs <gnso-contro-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Fwd: [gnso-contro-wg] final draft 05
  • From: Avri Doria <avri@xxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 9 May 2007 02:03:08 -0400


I had not noticed that Victoria had given me permission to pass her comments on to the list. I based many of the changes on these changes though i did restructure them somewhat.


Begin forwarded message:

From: "vmcevedy" <vmcevedy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 8 maj 2007 15.55.32 EDT
To: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [gnso-contro-wg] final draft 05

A --attached is a redline with my comments. I guess you might want to circulate to sub group before doing anything with it. Sorry its extensive. Ill wait for majority before submitting minority.

cheers. v

----- Original Message ----- From: "Avri Doria" <avri@xxxxxxx>
To: "Controversial TLDs" <gnso-contro-wg@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2007 8:27 PM
Subject: [gnso-contro-wg] final draft 05


an inconsistency was pointed out to me.  I had not modified the table
to take into account the decision concerning consensus decisions in
the Advisory committee.

Recommendation 1  should read:

1. Propose creating a category called Controversial
Names for use at the top level only. A label that
is applied for would be considered Controversial
if during the Public Comment phase of the new
gTLD application process the label becomes
disputed by a formal notice of a consensus
position or other formally supported decision process
from an ICANN Advisory Committee or
ICANN Supporting Organization, and otherwise
meets the definition of Controversial Names as
defined above.

I have attached the updated draft.


Attachment: My redline re dispute resolution procedures.doc
Description: MS-Word document

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy