ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[council]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [council] RE: URS follow-up

  • To: Jonathan Robinson <jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Subject: Re: [council] RE: URS follow-up
  • From: John Berard <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:26:35 -0700
  • Cc: "<council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>" <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Kurt Pritz <kurt.pritz@xxxxxxxxx>, Olof Nordling <olof.nordling@xxxxxxxxx>
  • In-reply-to: <000f01cdb356$a77da0c0$f678e240$@ipracon.com>
  • List-id: council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • References: <C4B5E5D7461AB54B875986D2919CBB5FD1F3909F77@EXVPMBX100-1.exc.icann.org> <000f01cdb356$a77da0c0$f678e240$@ipracon.com>
  • Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Jonathan,

How can you say "the provision of URS services is an area where I have some 
systems, process and related expertise" when the URS doesn't yet exist?  

In my view, we can go overboard with regard to conflicts.  Even your suggestion 
of Mason to lead the conversation can be open to criticism.  After all, why 
wouldn't a registry want a high price on the URS?

See how it can go?

At this point I suggest you keep your seat for this until you prove otherwise!

My 2 cents.

Berard

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 26, 2012, at 1:48 AM, "Jonathan Robinson" 
<jonathan.robinson@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> the provision of URS services is an area where I have some systems, process 
> and related expertise. 




<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>