Regarding the “considerable size” standard in the CPE evaluation, Alexander has raised an interesting point.  I meant the non-citizen Kurd population of northern Syria rather than all worldwide Kurd populations when talking about a community with shared challenges.  If we are to establish appeal processes and standards, “considerable” might require further definition. 

 

Would the estimated 400,000 non-citizen Kurds in Syria constitute a community of “considerable size” in comparison to the entire population of Kurds on the planet in all countries?  Or do the Syrian Kurds fail the “Extension” test?  Would it depend on exactly what TLD name they were seeking for the CPE Community?  So could the Syrian Kurds get CPE for (dot)syriankurds or (dot)non-citizenkurds?   And what if the Syrian government objected?

 

Maybe no one likes this example, but the point is that the attached EIU Guidelines for scoring just say: “Is the community of considerable size?”   What does the word, “considerable”, mean to panelists who are subject to being overturned on appeal and who have no precedents to follow?   

 

Anne

 

 

 

Jeff and Cheryl,

Regarding the EIU guidelines and possible adoption of a recommendation by the WG to continue with those in the next round, I have a couple of notes:

 

1. p. 4 - The Guidelines say re “Pre-existing” means that the community has to have existed since 2007 – assume we would need to change this date.

 

2. p.3 and 4 - There is language about awarding points based on the idea that the applicant entity was formed to “administer the community”.    Does this requirement make sense when we are trying to encourage Community TLDs for purposes of Applicant Freedom of Expression?  It would seem more appropriate to talk about an entity that is formed for the purpose of administering the TLD for a clearly-delineated community.   Is there an assumption here that all communities are somehow “administered”?  And was that the assumption in the 2012 AGB?

 

Maybe Jamie or others will have more background on this standard?

 

3. p. 5 – Re 1-B Extension – it is a bit confusing that the 1 point category is defined as “not meeting the 2 point category”  Is the only difference here the fact that 2 points emphasizes “considerable size AND longevity” whereas 1 point could mean “either considerable size OR longevity” or could the entity be of less than considerable “size” but have lots of longevity – maybe like the Kurds?

 

Thank you,

Anne

 

 

 

 

Anne E. Aikman-Scalese

Of Counsel

520.629.4428 office

520.879.4725 fax

AAikman@lrrc.com

_____________________________

Lewis Roca Rothgerber Christie LLP

One South Church Avenue, Suite 2000

Tucson, Arizona 85701-1611

lrrc.com

Because what matters

to you, matters to us.™