RE: [gnso-vi-feb10] refined version of Roberto's bullet-points -- pls review/comment within 24 hours

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I don't agree that anything further needs to be forwarded to the Board
at this point, and would be concerned that it just cause confusion and
delay. I don't see what they would get out of the points below that they
haven't gotten from the report.

So if it matters, my vote or opinion is that it not be sent. If the
Chairs deem there is consensus otherwise the. I would ask that at tleast
the last bullet be changed to simply read:

"While the WG has not identified exact examples there is a general
feeling that some exceptions could be granted."

There were many more examples discussed than the two cited in the text
below. Either they all should be cited or none at all, otherwise it
gives more weight to the two cited than there really is at this point.

Tim

> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: [gnso-vi-feb10] refined version of Roberto's bullet-points --
> pls review/comment within 24 hours
> From: "Mike O'Connor" <mike@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Mon, October 25, 2010 1:33 pm
> To: vertical integration wg <Gnso-vi-feb10@xxxxxxxxx>
> 
> hi all,
> 
> this is the revised version of the bullet-points that Roberto proposed to the 
> list -- thanks to all who contributed during our call.  we'd like to leave 
> them open for comments over the next 24 hours, and then forward them to the 
> Board in anticipation of their meeting this Thursday.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> mikey
> 
> 
> 
> �     Compliance is key (the working group spent a considerable amount of 
> time discussing the issue).  Whatever the rules established for the new TLDs, 
> we need adequate leadership, processes and resources in place to enforce them;
> �     There is no consensus on either full vertical integration or full 
> vertical separation;
> �     We have compiled a list of potential harms that may be associated with 
> either complete separation or complete integration. We have not finalized the 
> list, we have not focused on potential harms associated with partial 
> integration or separation, and we do not have consensus on the list we do 
> have.
> �     While the WG has not identified exact examples (although some cases 
> like cultural TLDs or brand TLDs have been discussed), there is a general 
> feeling that some exceptions could be granted.
> 
> 
> 
> - - - - - - - - -
> phone         651-647-6109  
> fax           866-280-2356  
> web   http://www.haven2.com
> handle        OConnorStP (ID for public places like Twitter, Facebook, 
> Google, etc.)