It is going to be hard to constructively debate the merits of a proposal that begins with a rather condescending ad hominem attack. There are multiple ways to bring a policy discussion in front of a larger / different audience than whatever group or stakeholder community you seek to raise it in, but I seriously doubt if the way you've done this is going to be all that effective. thanks --srs On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 6:38 AM, Peter Thimmesch <peter.thimmesch@depository.net> wrote:

John,

Please note that we have filed our proposal for accreditation of IP address registrars with ICANN over a month ago. (Please see ICANN's Correspondence Page, Letters from David Holtzman to David Olive and John Jeffrey, filed 2 March 2011, Proposed Statement of IP Policy) <http://www.icann.org/en/correspondence/statement-ip-address-registrar-accre ditation-policy-31mar11-en.pdf >

In addition we pointed out, in our opinion, that the current process for reviewing and approving a Global Policy is somewhat skewed towards the Regional Internet Registries. Hence we requested that due to this obvious and readily apparent Conflict-of-Interest (yes, I expect you will disagree with even this, which is so clear that to debate this would be simply too much even by the new standards that you have set recently in your online arguments with Prof. Mueller) we explore other forums to have the merits of the proposal aired.

Regards,

Peter Thimmesch

Chairman

-- Suresh Ramasubramanian (ops.lists@gmail.com)