The PICs are new, but they constitute a last-minute attempt to address a failure to include appropriate commitments or objectives in the original application. It appears that only the threat of an ALAC objection (and probably from the GAC too) has led to these last-minute interventions. In any case, it's a moot point -- for now. APRALO, AFRALO and LACRALO have approved advancement of the objections against the Latin string applications. We'll have to deal with this again when the ALAC vote comes, but for the moment there's no point arguing whether these should or should not be escalated for ALAC consideration. - Evan On 6 March 2013 13:52, Avri Doria <avri@ella.com> wrote:
Hi,
Not sure how anyone could have submitted a PIC much earlier, they were just invented.
As I said, the main reason for NOT supporting the objections is that there is NO Community here making a claim to protection.
This seems to be the result of one bitter past applicant (with every right to be bitter) that did not apply this time and a few small organization that do not claim Community status. I do not see how anyone could decide this merited Community protection. Other sensitivities, perhaps, but Community - way too much of a stretch for this particular word or Objection.
avri
On 6 Mar 2013, at 13:41, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Submitting PICs at this late date gives us insufficient time to evaluate. And the timing suggests that they were done specifically to placate us, only once a threat of an ALAC objection became real.
If/when these objections get advanced to the ALAC, I may reconsider my support for them when it's time for me to vote. But for now I encourage NARALO to support the advancement of the objections, at least to the next stage.
- Evan (via mobile)
On 2013-03-06 2:01 PM, "Avri Doria" <avri@ella.com> wrote: Hi,
Indeed since writing my note, I see that 3/4 are listed as submitting PICs. None had been when I checked just before writing.
This does not change my recommendation against the Objection, but it does indicate that they may have a leg to stand on in the discussions with the GAC.
Thanks for pointing out the change
avri
On 6 Mar 2013, at 12:42, Garth Bruen wrote:
FYI, DotHealth has submitted a PIC
-----Original Message----- From: newgtldrg-bounces@icann.org [mailto:newgtldrg-bounces@icann.org] On Behalf Of Dev Anand Teelucksingh Sent: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 12:38 PM To: New gTLD Review Group Cc: ICANN GTLD WG list Subject: [New gTLD RG] PICs posted by applicants "dot Health Limited" and "DotHealth, LLC"
Updated the wiki pages with links to PIC from "dot Health Limited" applicant as posted on ICANN's website https://community.icann.org/x/xYxwAg
and link to PIC from applicant "DotHealth, LLC" as sent to the gTLD RG. https://community.icann.org/x/t4xwAg
Dev Anand Teelucksingh _______________________________________________ Newgtldrg mailing list Newgtldrg@icann.org https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/newgtldrg
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss
Visit the NARALO online at http://www.naralo.org ------
-- Evan Leibovitch Toronto Canada Em: evan at telly dot org Sk: evanleibovitch Tw: el56