RE: [gtld-council] Updated recommendation table - new IGP (h)

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thanks Philip.

The objector may not have a basis for providing evidence from all of the
'community' or from 'users' in general so I think we should narrow the
wording somewhat.  Also, some members of the RyC like the word
'verifiable' so I added it back in.  How about the following?

"h) detriment
Verifiable evidence must be provided of detriment to the legitimate
rights or interests of that portion of the community represented by the
objector."

Chuck Gomes
 
"This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
which it is addressed, and may contain information that is privileged,
confidential and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. Any
unauthorized use, distribution, or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If
you have received this message in error, please notify sender
immediately and destroy/delete the original transmission." 
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> [mailto:owner-gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> Philip Sheppard
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2007 11:00 AM
> To: gtld-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [gtld-council] Updated recommendation table - new IGP (h)
> 
> 
> Chuck,
> I see your objective now.
> It's a good point.
> 
> Current wording of IGp (h) is:
> h) detriment
> Evidence of detriment to the community or to users more 
> widely must be provided.
> 
> I agree lets change (as Chuck suggests) to:
> h) detriment
> Evidence of detriment to the legitimate rights or interests, 
> of the community or to users more widely, must be provided.
> 
> Philip
> 
>