Dear Co-Chairs, My colleague (who reads in copy under directors@omadhina.net) stated the below,,which I herewith bring to your attention. I, furthermore read this as: "You wasted enormous amounts of money and time, became bogged down in details, rushing them, loosing the big picture, and you haven't even thought your stuff through properly" (or as he wrote "thoughtfully"). I particularly am concerned about the absolutely correct reference to stability of the DNS. Which are obviously not of concern to constituencies like the IPC, and the lobbyists driving the process, but the very reason for any and all of this ICANN related stuff. And, he is right, none of this even remotely considers this or the impact of the CWG Stewardship proposal. Having NO accountability measures whatsoever for the issues affecting ccTLD Managers, not knowing about the fundamental issues (the root zone, statutory basis for any of this, etc) is a HUGE risk. Not only to the stability of the DNS. But, go ahead ignore him too... greetings, el -- Sent from Dr Lisse's iPad mini
On Jun 17, 2015, at 10:23, Dr Ben Fuller wrote:
I read this as: “Here are some questions/concerns that if not adequately answered may trigger a more public response from the US Government, perhaps Congress. So it might be worth your while to get these issues sorted ASAP.”
This sentiment should be transmitted to the CCWG in a way that they can all understand.
[...]