Better alternative Rubens. Vanda Scartezini Polo Consultores Associados Av. Paulista 1159, cj 1004 01311-200- Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil Land Line: +55 11 3266.6253 Mobile: + 55 11 98181.1464 Sorry for any typos. On 2/25/20, 00:55, "Gnso-newgtld-wg on behalf of Rubens Kuhl" <gnso-newgtld-wg-bounces@icann.org on behalf of rubensk@nic.br> wrote: Replace "As was the case in the 2012 round, applicants should continue to be given the opportunity through Clarifying Questions to respond to comments that might impact scoring." With "As was the case in the 2012 round, when an application comment would make an evaluator reduces scoring, applicants must have the opportunity through Clarifying Questions to respond." Rewording just changes it to "should"; when rewriting, the use of must occurred to me as a better option, but it's a bit of a substantive change. Rubens