[gnso-rpm-wg] Critique of INTA survey
icann at leap.com
Thu Aug 31 12:08:58 UTC 2017
That doesn't make any sense. Again, I did not reference that late July
paper from EFF until you incorrectly linked my postings to it (i.e.
until today). I brought up the topic of elimination of the sunrise
period on April 13, see:
"A Brave New World Without Sunrises or the TMCH"
EFF made their formal proposal to eliminate the sunrise on April 19th,
after I had already made my views known:
The August 10th thread you mention:
was **2 weeks** after the EFF paper, and had absolutely no relation to
it. To suggest it came "on the heels of it" is incorrect.
I was referencing only the formal call for elimination of sunrise that
they made back in April (i.e. an ongoing proposal that our PDP is
tasked to consider).
That July paper:
is completely unrelated. They don't discuss the 99% reduction in
sunrise utilization. I was the one that first discussed that 99%
figure, in order to support their April proposal.
On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 7:38 AM, Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com> wrote:
> I remember Jeremy describing the paper. I was referring to the email chain
> you started entitled on the heels of that paper, " 99%+ reduction in sunrise
> utilization rate per TLD supports EFF call for elimination of sunrise,”
> that, to me, established a link between your arguments and the paper.
> On Aug 31, 2017, at 11:46 AM, George Kirikos <icann at leap.com> wrote:
> Hi Kurt,
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 5:47 AM, Kurt Pritz <kurt at kjpritz.com> wrote:
> "1) George refers to the EFF and in past emails has particularly
> referred to the EFF white paper, "Which Internet registries offer the
> best protection for domain owners?” as justification for eliminated
> the Sunrise RPM.....Yet, because it is “published," this is the source
> cited often on this list as authority for eliminating Sunrise."
> I don't recall ever referencing that particular paper in this working
> group. I advocated elimination of the Sunrise RPM long before that
> paper was even published. That paper only came out in late July:
> and as per the archives, no one ever replied to that thread. I've
> searched past emails, and can't find myself referencing it all here.
> My reasoning for elimination of sunrise isn't based at all on that
> study, especially since the reasoning predated that study.
> Not only has it not been "cited often", it's unclear anyone but Jeremy
> has even mentioned it.
> If you have a link to me (or anyone else for that matter) referencing
> that paper on this PDP mailing list, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise, I
> think you should correct your statement.
> George Kirikos
More information about the gnso-rpm-wg