RE: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] rev 2.19-1 after listening to the phone call.

[carlos dionisio aguirre <carlosaguirre62@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

I completely agree with Avri. this is not a substancial difference and nothing 
change in my humble apinion. 

my two cents. 

Carlos Dionisio Aguirre
ALAC member by LACRALO - ICANN
Abogado - Especialista en Derecho de los Negocios
Sarmiento 71 - 4to. 18 Cordoba - Argentina -
*54-351-424-2123 / 423-5423
http://ar.ageiadensi.org 




> Subject: Re: [soac-newgtldapsup-wg] rev 2.19-1 after listening to the phone 
> call.
> From: avri@xxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 00:05:24 +0500
> To: soac-newgtldapsup-wg@xxxxxxxxx
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> But we held a poll. 
> 
> On 21 Oct 2010, at 21:28, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
> 
> > 
> > On continuity:
> > 
> > I agree with Tijani on the WG's on-list and on-call record is that there 
> > was more support for 6 months than for 12 or 36
> 
> on this one the wording on the poll could be seen as ambiguous.  
> And that is why I asked the question which no one has answered yet.
> 
> Tell does it really make that great a diference between 6 months and 12 
> months?
> 
> I understand that there was consensus for less than 36.  but is 6 versus 12 a 
> criticial issue?
> if so, why?
> 
> 
> > months.
> > 
> > On eligibility:
> > 
> > I agree with Tijani on the WG's on-list and on-call record is that the 
> > opposition to support for entrepreneurs from developing countries who meet 
> > the need criterion was very limited.
> 
> On this one, I think the pool was quite clear and I interpret it as people 
> who had not spoken up before, spoke up in the poll.
> 
> That is part of running the poll.
> 
> a.
> 
> 
> 
>