Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?

[Stéphane Van Gelder <stephane.vangelder@xxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Alan. I was search adverse when I sent my previous email ;) Please 
disregard it Margie.

Stéphane

Le 7 avr. 2010 à 23:58, Alan Greenberg a écrit :

> 
> For those who are search-adverse, it can be found at 
> https://st.icann.org/vert-integration-pdp/index.cgi?vertical_integration_pdp.
> 
> Alan
> 
> At 07/04/2010 05:01 PM, Margie Milam wrote:
> 
>> Roberto,
>> 
>> We have a resource page on our WIKI that contains links to various documents 
>> related to vertical integration.  I will update it to include terms commonly 
>> used by the working group.
>> 
>> Best Regards,
>> 
>> Margie
>> _____________
>> Margie Milam
>> Senior Policy Counselor
>> ICANN
>> ______________
>> ________________________________________
>> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
>> Behalf Of Roberto Gaetano [roberto@xxxxxxxxx]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 2:01 PM
>> To: 'Ken Stubbs'; tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> Cc: 'Avri Doria'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> Subject: RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?
>> 
>> Thanks, Ken, I should have proposed it.
>> Unless I misread, most of the acronyms come from Avri.
>> 
>> Avri,
>> Can you please start getting the ball rolling with an initial list?
>> We will keep it up to date as we go (and as new jargon is used :<(
>> 
>> A question to staff.
>> Don't we have an area where to keep reference material like this?
>> 
>> R.
>> 
>> 
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ken Stubbs
>> > Sent: Wednesday, 07 April 2010 21:12
>> > To: tbarrett@xxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Cc: 'Avri Doria'; Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> > Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?
>> >
>> >
>> > Ken Stubbs wrote:
>> >
>> > Wouldn't hurt to put together a glossary of all the
>> > abbreviations used in these emails as well (i.e. such as
>> > sr,oco,srsu,srmu,ro)
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On 4/7/2010 11:39 AM, Thomas Barrett - EnCirca wrote:
>> > >
>> > > We really need to stop and take some time to agree on some
>> > definitions of
>> > > the terms we are using.
>> > >
>> > > I was assuming the whole purpose of discussing vertical
>> > integration was that
>> > > it might be a possible option for all and any new gtld
>> > applicant, regardless
>> > > of purpose or business model.
>> > >
>> > > No one has said it should be limited to SR or
>> > community-based applicants
>> > > only.
>> > >
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> > [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx]
>> > > On Behalf Of Avri Doria
>> > > Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2010 11:27 AM
>> > > To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
>> > > Subject: Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] What do we mean by "single registrant"?
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 7 Apr 2010, at 11:00, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> What advocate of "single registrant" is going to put a
>> > motion on the
>> > >> next Council agenda to recommend to the Board to direct Staff to
>> > >> create a "single registrant" type of application?
>> > >>
>> > >
>> > > i do not see it as necessary.
>> > >
>> > > i also do not see it as excluded from the current charter
>> > as i see SR (both
>> > > C and NC) and community based cultural/linguistic (CCL)
>> > TLDs as being the
>> > > only possible reasons for allowing any degree of VI.
>> > >
>> > > and as I say, is see no reason yet, for>0CO especially if we have no
>> > > possible reasons for any degree of VI
>> > >
>> > > so, if SR is really off the table, then perhaps we are done.
>> > >
>> > > a.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>