Dear Group, We are always talking about “Government Support” – and many here share a healthy distain for “Governments” (especially “Federal Governments”). But an applicant for a non-capital city doesn’t need the support by the “federal government” of the respective nation; it is the CITY GOVERNMENT that decides! These are city constituent based city representatives! They know their city best! Thanks, Alexander From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 [mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Paul Rosenzweig Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2018 1:27 AM To: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch; gregshatanipc@gmail.com Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments No, I didn’t overlook that. It just transfers the burden to someone else and either makes ICANN the judge of ambiguity or makes ambiguity the rule. And, no, this is not an easy task … I’m glad you think it is … so I invite the Swiss government to do it for the world :0) Paul Rosenzweig <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com O: +1 (202) 547-0660 M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738-1739 <http://www.redbranchconsulting.com/> www.redbranchconsulting.com My PGP Key: <https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684> https://keys.mailvelope.com/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9A830097CA066684 From: Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> > Sent: Wednesday, June 27, 2018 5:31 PM To: paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com <mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com> ; gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: AW: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments Dear Paul You may overlooked that I suggested that this information may be assembled by ICANN and offered to potential applicants through e.g. an advisory panel – see points (3) and (4) I proposed at the beginning… In the age of big data that should be simple. sorry if I did not express this with absolute clarity… Best Jorge Von: Paul Rosenzweig [mailto:paul.rosenzweig@redbranchconsulting.com] Gesendet: Mittwoch, 27. Juni 2018 16:26 An: Cancio Jorge BAKOM <Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> >; gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Betreff: RE: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments I’m not sure that can work – now an applicant would have to be familiar with the law of 190+ nations to determine which are “cities” and which are not and therefore which need to pre-clear the application and which don’t. ICANN is an international organization. It works because it relies on international standards. If there is an international standard on what defines a city, that’s a plausible ground (though I would disagree with it in substance). The idea that an applicant needs to know Swiss law and Bhutanese law and Kazahk law on defining cities is simply not realistic. Paul Paul Rosenzweig M: +1 (202) 329-9650 VOIP: +1 (202) 738 1739 From: Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5 <gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5-bounces@icann.org> > On Behalf Of Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch <mailto:Jorge.Cancio@bakom.admin.ch> Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 6:17 PM To: gregshatanipc@gmail.com <mailto:gregshatanipc@gmail.com> Cc: gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org <mailto:gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5@icann.org> Subject: Re: [Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] New gTLD Subsequent Procedures PDP: Work Track 5 Comments