Re: [gnso-vi-feb10] RE: First Draft of VI Initial Report v.1

["Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>]

a perfect example of the kind of review/suggestion i am hoping we can produce.  
i've started a punch-list of these...

thanks,

mikey


On Jul 15, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:

> A comment:
>  
> The following statement, especially when taken in context, seems exaggerated 
> and could be cut altogether:
>  
> “It cannot be overstated, based on public skepticism of historic enforcement 
> challenges, that a new compliance and enforcement program should be in place, 
> properly financed and staffed and operationally effective prior to changes 
> that would open the door to potential anti-competitive conduct and abusive 
> practices.”
>  
> I don’t think there is wide consensus on this statement. One of my key 
> concerns here is the words “prior to changes that would open the door”  - 
> this allows those who might be using “compliance” as a delaying or FUD tactic 
> to claim always that we can’t move forward because the proper mechanisms are 
> not in place yet. In fact, compliance capabilities and techniques will always 
> have to evolve in tandem with the implementation of new TLDs. As a practical 
> matter we have to define the policy, start to implement it, and then at the 
> same time calibrate our compliance and enforcement capabilities.
>  
>  
>  
> From: owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx] On 
> Behalf Of Margie Milam
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2010 10:24 PM
> To: Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] First Draft of VI Initial Report v.1
> Importance: High
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> In preparation for the call VI call tomorrow,  please find attached the First 
> Draft of the Initial Report for your review and consideration.   
>  
> As you review this Draft, please note that:
>  
> ·         Due to the size of the document (currently over 90 pages!)  I have 
> excluded the annexes and provide only the text of the report.  
> ·         The SRSU description is especially thin and needs further content 
> from IPC representatives and from NCSG representatives.   
> ·         Please disregard any formatting issues as I will be doing a more 
> thorough review of the document as it becomes more final.
> ·         Once the results of the poll are in,  someone will need to draft 
> content with any observations that to be included in Section 6.
>  
> Unfortunately, I will not be on tomorrow’s call, but Marika will manage the 
> call in my absence.    I will be in an all-day meeting in MDR, and will 
> follow up with Marika after the VI call.
>  
> Best regards,
>  
> Margie
>  
> ____________
>  
> Margie Milam
> Senior Policy Counselor
> ICANN
> ____________

- - - - - - - - -
phone   651-647-6109  
fax             866-280-2356  
web     http://www.haven2.com
handle  OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, Google, etc.)