There are other applications that have long been *mature* (DD+regional advices). Shall we count how many we can vote in Lisbon on Sunday Meeting?
Hong
On 3/21/07, Nick Ashton-Hart <nick.ashton-hart@icann.org> wrote:
May I suggest that the fastest way to conclude a vote on this appliication is actually to take the vote in the Lisbon meetings.
On 21/03/07, Wendy Seltzer <wendy@seltzer.com
> wrote:
At 03:13 AM 3/21/2007, Wendy Seltzer wrote:
>Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:
> >
> > These larger questions you reference are important, but if you do not deal
> > with the question at hand pretty quickly, then the likelihood of another
> > Ombudsman investigation of ALS applications is a real possibility.
>
>Fine.
Just to clarify -- I'm prepared to withstand challenge from the
ombudsman on his reinterpretation of our substantive criteria for
evaluating ALS applicants. The responsibility for defining those
falls squarely on ALAC, consistent with the Bylaws, and so long as we
have a rational, reasoned basis for our application of those
criteria, he has no power to change that, even at the vociferous
complaint of a denied applicant.
In order not to give applicants a claim of "undue delay," however, I
move that we open and conduct a new vote ASAP (since we have already
heard objections, we're past the point of a no objections approval of
this applicant).
--Wendy
--
Wendy Seltzer -- wendy@seltzer.org
Visiting Assistant Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School
Fellow, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/seltzer.html
http://www.chillingeffects.org/
_______________________________________________
ALAC mailing list
ALAC@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/alac_atlarge-lists.icann.org
www.alac.icann.org
www.icannalac.org