[governance] Re: [bestbits] Comments asking ICANN to deny application for .pharmacy registration

[McTim]

On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 12:26 PM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> On Monday 13 May 2013 07:41 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Parminder you have completely missed the point. In a rather disturbing way.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> It is surprising to what elegantly logical length people can go to shirk
> responsibility.... It seems to be written all over the report that
> 'closed generic' TLDs are bad for public interest, but it is amusing how
> the Independent Objector (IO) wriggles out of the responsibility of
> having to do anything about them.
>
> The IO said that the specific, limited criteria on which he is allowed to
> object do not allow him to object to a TLD simply because it is a closed
> generic.
> He is correct.
>
>
> [parminder] Pl see my email. I said, either IO is wrong (he  applied
> creteria inappropriately) or ICANN is wrong to have laid inappropriate and
> insufficient creteria......



Is there a zero chance that the IO is correct AND the Applicant
Guidebook is appropriate and sufficient?  Not even the remotest
possibility??


-- 
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t