[Gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4] Registry Services straw-person

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On Aug 31, 2017, at 8:22 PM, Aikman-Scalese, Anne <AAikman at lrrc.com> wrote:
> 
> Rubens,
> I don’ t have an objection to establishing 2 tracks – one for established services evaluation and one for new proposed services evaluation.

You don't, but most people do, as both the call and the mailing list discussion have shown.

> 
> I do object to charging more for an application that proposes new services – it’s against the goal of innovation and creativity.

Something that can be raised for applicant support. It's a worthy cause, and lots of jurisdiction give tax breaks to R&D, innovation, entrepreneurship ... it's just out of scope for WT4.

>  I do object to dealing with proposals for new services in the contracting phase.  It is not transparent to the community.
> 

Not including the community in registry services reviews is how current GNSO policy is. This WG is not chartered to review it.


Rubens

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4/attachments/20170831/729b1d0d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 496 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/gnso-newgtld-wg-wt4/attachments/20170831/729b1d0d/signature.asc>