On the money printing machine argument, this is an argument in favor of no new generic TLDs at all. I don't see it as unique to .XXX. In the GNSO's new TLD task force, we've heard this time and time again from the intellectual property and business constituencies. They only want sponsored TLDs, like .JOBS and .MUSEUM, because they feel compelled to register their names defensively in TLDs like .INFO and .BIZ. And keep in mind that commercial registries are in the business of making money. If you don't create new registries and new TLDs to enter the market, you're just keeping the money printing press at Verisign. It's not as though we're going to make the registration business non-commercial by keeping out new players. On the government aspect, I think the Board should not speculate on the way governments might react. The Board should only take account of what is part of the public record. If governments want to formally object and send their concerns to the Board via letter, either individually or via the GAC, then it would be appropriate to address those concerns. If the Board is getting feedback through the back channel, then it should encourage those speakers to make a formal statement that can be part of the formal record. I also think it's important to remember that, by and large, the representatives of the GAC are mid-level beaurocrats who do not stay in their respective positions very long. They may not actually speak for the government when they are speaking off the record. If you really want to know what the government of Freedonia thinks, then you need to ask Freedonia to make a statement on the record. Bret