<div dir="ltr">Hi McTim,<div><br></div><div>The civil society statement of support for the IANA Transition can be found here: <a href="http://bestbits.net/iana-transition/">http://bestbits.net/iana-transition/</a></div><div><br></div><div>All the best,</div><div><br></div><div>Melanie </div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 2:37 PM, McTim <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:dogwallah@gmail.com" target="_blank">dogwallah@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Hi,<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="">On Tue, May 24, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Edward Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:egmorris1@toast.net" target="_blank">egmorris1@toast.net</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif;font-size:12px"><div>HI McTim,</div>
<div> </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Although I might be surprised, I doubt the NCSG will have a consensus on an approach to the transition.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I strongly support the Heritage approach to the transition. It should be noted that Brett made it very clear that he supports the transition. I believe the words he used, words that seem to have confused a few people here, were "I support the transition". It's just that his position, IMHO, takes a far more mature, sophisticated and nuanced approach to the matter than the speed racer approach espoused during the Senate hearing by our commercial colleagues. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>From the perspective of the noncommercial commiunity, the soft graduated transition is the better option for two very specific reasons:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>1. In creating an accountable ICANN we reinvented the corporation. </div></span></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>We didn't, it is just tinkering around the edges.</div><span class=""><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif;font-size:12px"><div>Our new corporate model is untried, untested and is a completely new construction without precedent. </div></span></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>As was ICANN in the earliest days.</div><span class=""><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-family:Arial,Helvetica,Sans-Serif;font-size:12px"><div>Many of us in the NCSG preferred a membership model based upon California statute that had greater certainty. Our views were rejected. I don't know if the model we have created will actually work as intended. No one does. This was so rushed </div></span></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>In fact is has been delayed for many years....not "rushed".</div><div><br></div><div>There is a letter circulating amongst CS folks supporting the transition, does anyone have the link to that?</div><div><br></div></div><span class="">-- <br><div>Cheers,<br><br>McTim<br>"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there." Jon Postel</div>
</span></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.6666669845581px"><i>Melanie Penagos</i></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.6666669845581px"><font color="#666666"><i>International Policy Associate<br></i></font></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.6666669845581px"><b><font color="#666666">Public Knowledge</font></b></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-family:arial"><font color="#0000ff" face="arial, sans-serif"><span style="font-size:12.6666669845581px"><u><a href="http://www.publicknowledge.org/" target="_blank">http://www.publicknowledge.org/</a></u></span></font><br></div><div style="color:rgb(136,136,136);font-size:12.6666669845581px">+1 (202) 861-0020 ext. 122 | <font color="#666666">skype: melanie.penagos | </font><font color="#0000ff"><a href="https://twitter.com/ampenagos" target="_blank">@ampenagos</a></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
</div>