Fwd: RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report

[Norbert Klein <nhklein@xxxxxxx>]

I also agree with Avri's suggestion, where others already consented.

At the table I was - and I later talking to people from another table - there 
was opposition to the "One IDNccTLD per one script per one language 
group": "their government should decide to choose just one."

I was surprised about the lack of sensitivity on the political/social/cultural 
implications. I argued - as a example - saying that it would be highly 
destructive in the presently tense situation, if the Malaysian government 
would give preference to the Chinese over against the Indian ethnic sections 
of the society by allocating only one IDNccTLD, but this was dismissed 
as "not ICANN's problem."

Norbert

-

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------

Subject: RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
Date: Monday, 11 February 2008
From: "Edmon Chung" <edmon@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'Council GNSO'" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>


Agreed.
Edmon


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
>
>
> The same issue was raised at our table Avri.
>
> I believe your suggested change would be appropriate.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Kinderis

-- 
If you want to know what is going on in Cambodia,
please visit us regularly - you can find something new every day:

http://cambodiamirror.wordpress.com 

Agreed.
Edmon


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of Adrian Kinderis
> Sent: Monday, February 11, 2008 10:11 AM
> To: Avri Doria; Council GNSO
> Subject: RE: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
>
>
> The same issue was raised at our table Avri.
>
> I believe your suggested change would be appropriate.
>
> Regards,
>
> Adrian Kinderis
> Managing Director
> AusRegistry Group Pty Ltd
> Level 8, 10 Queens Road
> Melbourne. Victoria Australia. 3004
> Ph: +61 3 9866 3710
> Fax: +61 3 9866 1970
> Email: adrian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Web: www.ausregistrygroup.com
>
> The information contained in this communication is intended for the
> named recipients only. It is subject to copyright and may contain
> legally privileged and confidential information and if you are not an
> intended recipient you must not use, copy, distribute or take any action
> in reliance on it. If you have received this communication in error,
> please delete all copies from your system and notify us immediately.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Avri Doria
> Sent: Monday, 11 February 2008 12:59 PM
> To: Council GNSO
> Subject: [council] Response to ccNSO/GAC Issues report
>
>
> Hi,
>
> At my table this evening, we had a conversation about Executive
> summary point #5 - specifically the last phrase "... without GNSO's
> concurrence"
>
> While explaning it this, I explained that it really refered to the
> need to have have resolved the issue as explained in #2 and the ICANn
> community had  achieved a common agreement of an interim procedure.
>
> I am wondering whether we might be to change it to say: " without
> prior community concurrence"
>
> thanks
>
> a.