<<a) the status quo is dangerous>> Have plenty of data to support this <<b) the proposed studies will only delay and not sufficiently advance the solution>> Have already writen a memo to David Giza explaining this, will share with the group <<c) our proposal addresses both the needs and the concerns that exist.>> Yup, if we all work together I think we can make a compelling case

-------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: [NA-Discuss] Domain-name abuse proliferates From: Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> Date: Tue, September 15, 2009 11:37 am To: Garth Bruen at KnujOn <gbruen@knujon.com> Cc: Alan Greenberg <alan.greenberg@mcgill.ca>, NA Discuss <na-discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org> Garth Bruen at KnujOn wrote:

...

I've read the proposed studies and reviewed all the previous ones. They are designed to not find anything useful. Their methodology is flawed and the sample sizes too small to reveal anything meaningful. It's just for show. They've never moved on the GAO study or any other recommended fixes, I don't think the new studies will help.

That's fine, but we have to make that case clear in our position. We need to put forward -- with proof and compelling logic -- that a) the status quo is dangerous b) the proposed studies will only delay and not sufficiently advance the solution c) our proposal addresses both the needs and the concerns that exist. - Evan