[ncdnhc-discuss] Re: guidance on .org

[Milton Mueller]

Chris, I did strongly fight against Touton's
intervention on the Names Council.

However, I lost. Political realities make it 
completely fruitless to avoid the ICANN's 
staff's insistence that we conform
to their template contracts. Furthermore,
fighting about that issue would threaten
our real policy objectives regarding .org,
as we would be fighting about process
and governance issues rather than defining
policies for .org

It's not ME who caved in on this issue,
it's the rest of the Names Council, all 
of them except YJ and me. Including our 
own Vany Martinez.

If there are no other supporters who
will insist that the TF work be accepted,
then we must work within the constraints
imposed on us. 

So, do you want sponsored or unsponsored?

>>> Chris Bailey <chrisbailey at gn.apc.org> 12/19/01 06:20AM >>>
Dear Milton,

At the face to face meeting of the NCDNHC in MDR a "sponsored, 
unrestricted" .org was supported overwhelming (27 to 2, I think?). It is a 
perfectly valid concept that has been discussed at length and in detail 
here. As you say, the ICANN staff however "have promoted the (false) idea 
that it "cannot be executed."" So why are you proposing that we give in to 
this false idea instead of countering it?