Re: [gnso-dow123] FW: MarkMonitor's WHOIS Comments

[Ross Rader <ross@xxxxxxxxxx>]

maggie.mansourkia@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> I'm simply saying that these other organizations that are complaining to you 
> should likewise go back to Mark Monitor and demand the same clarifications?  It 
> seems like such a simple fix,  I don't understand what has led them to believe 
> that their positions should be represented through private conversations with a 
> task force member?  If any organization misrepresented my company's position, I 
> would certainly demand a public retraction.  

Not my issue to sort out. But given that even MarkMonitor is unclear 
which signatories are real and which ones aren't, then we shouldn't be 
accepting their claims at face value.

> If you don't lend any credence to this one posting, why the obsession with it?

I'm just trying to make sense out of the point you keep trying to make.

I'd like to just move on and close the work of this TF by focusing on 
the substance of the submissions made and avoid making a contest of who 
has more signatures behind their document. If there's any additive merit 
to the MarkMonitor submission, then let's consider it on those grounds. 
If there's no merit, then let's move on.

-ross