May 25, 2016
8:54 p.m.
Andrew,
On 25 May 2016, at 21:29, Andrew Sullivan <ajs@anvilwalrusden.com> wrote: [...]
The transition proposal is simply a proposal to eliminate a function that is unneeded and does no work. [...]
Nothing in this is simple, and whether it is unneeded is open for debate. However when it suits ICANN it alleges that the function does work.
Why is it seen as "a little insulting"?
Because people all over the world have worked tirelessly over the past several years to hammer out a detailed consensus that finely balances a whole bunch of considerations,
[...] The amount of work can not be used as rationale. Never mind that the fine balance is open to debate. [...] el