Re: [ga] More legal ammunition against WLS
--- Jeff Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > "4.2.4 principles for allocation of Registered Names (e.g.,
> > first-come/first-served, timely renewal, holding period after
> > expiration);"
> > It is reasonable to believe that WLS would represent an alteration
> > the allocation of Registered Names, and thus requires a new or
> > specification and/or policy.
> I don't see how George. Section 4.2.4 id dealing with INITIAL
> registration of a DN, not DN that have lapsed due to non renewal.
I disagree. I don't see the words "initial". It's a change in the
allocation mechanism for expired names.
> you would have a beef with the ICANN Staff, and 2.) In that there is
> no "Official" vote on WLS which I pushed for but got little support
> on, it would be difficult to counter claim that a consensus was not
> present either.
The Registrar Community had the official vote, and WLS lost. That was
enough to defeat any notion of 'consensus'. Whether the GA held a vote
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Movies - coverage of the 74th Academy Awards®
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html