Hello all, So... the GNSO statement on domain tasting is up for public review (see below). Is it appropriate for NARALO to take this time to state that its recommendation is acceptable as a partial interim measure but that the ultimate issue is elimination of the AGP? The way I could see us framing things, tasting is a symptom and the AGP is the cause. Leaving the AGP in place may eliminate one specific form of gaming the system, but still encourages bad agents to seek out other ways to use the AGP to screw the public. What says everyone? Do we make a statement as NARALO, or leave the GNSO doc to go to the board without comment? - Evan *From:* (…)* *Denise Michel *Sent:* Saturday, May 03, 2008 8:18 AM *Subject:* Call for Comments on GNSO Domain Tasting Motion To: Supporting Organization and Advisory Committee Chairs (…) From: Denise Michel, VP - Policy Development Subject: Call for Comments on GNSO Domain Tasting Motion Please note that a forum for public comments has been opened regarding the recent action by the GNSO Council to approve by super majority vote a motion to discourage use of the current "add grace period" (AGP). The forum can be found at <http://icann.org/public_comment/#dt-motion-21may08>. The motion, which is now pending for Board action, would specifically prohibit any gTLD operator that has implemented an "add grace period" (AGP) from offering a refund for any domain name deleted during the AGP that exceeds 10% of its net new registrations during that month, or fifty domain names, whichever is greater. An exemption could be granted based on extraordinary circumstances, as detailed in the motion. The public and all interested parties are invited to comment on this motion before final consideration by the Board. (…) Regards, Denise Michel Vice President Policy