[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5] Motion to include a notion of “Elimination of the 'non-geo use provision' for sizeable cities” in the report

[Rosalía Morales]

Dear Mike,

Stating that "The compromise of 2012 went too far kowtowing to government demands, holding the entire program hostage” does not seem accurate. As far as I’m concerned, the program went by pretty well for some few exceptions. Taking into account the opinions of other stakeholder groups is not holding the program hostage, is actually how the multistakeholder model works and how this group is supposed to work.  All opinions (not “demands”) are welcomed in this process and are the key elements of ICANN.

Best,
Rosal'ia
[cid:B190111C-4AAD-456E-809F-8934B6CA8935]

On Sep 7, 2018, at 11:14 AM, Mike Rodenbaugh <mike at rodenbaugh.com<mailto:mike at rodenbaugh.com>> wrote:

went way too far kowtowing to government demands, holding the entire program hostage

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180907/68be8c56/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Rosalia-Morales.png
Type: image/png
Size: 9809 bytes
Desc: Rosalia-Morales.png
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt5/attachments/20180907/68be8c56/Rosalia-Morales.png>