[NCAP-Discuss] [Ext] Revised draft of NCAP Study 1 report

[Rubens Kuhl]

> On 8 Feb 2020, at 20:54, Danny McPherson <danny at tcb.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> Rubens,
> I've heard you say this multiple times, and yet here you are on the NCAP WG.

I thought this was an ICANN community effort, not Verisign's.


> 
> _Everything we've done stands on technical merit and nearly all of it was at the genesis of SSAC recommendations, not Verisign's.  Again, if you have _facts to suggest otherwise everyone here is surely interested in them, else could you please move the trolling elsewhere, this isn't the first time you've brought it here.

I'm still waiting for the basis that where, answering GAC Beijing communiqué, Verisign affirmed that people could die due to new TLD delegations. Everything Verisign published so far never included factual basis for that.




Rubens





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 529 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/ncap-discuss/attachments/20200209/3e966fe2/signature.asc>