European Commission: Difference between revisions

Line 101:

The fourth paper can be read [http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf here].

ICANN followers largely agree with the issues raised in this paper~~. One concern raised with this document focuses on tone over content~~. Since many of the EC's suggestions have been made before by others, it seems that they are only weighing in on a constantly important topic. [[Nigel Roberts]] notes how regrettable the move by [[Peter Dengate Thrush]] was for the organization, and calls on ICANN to address the issues raised in this paper.<ref>[http://nigel.je/ Nigel Roberts' blog, Nigel.je]</ref> [[Milton Mueller]] notes that the fact that they are not issuing papers with room for public comments, holding discussions with their European constituents, or officially releasing these documents they are demonstrating their desire to directly manipulate [[ICANN]]'s structure and function.<ref>[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf InternetGovernance.org/blog]</ref>

ICANN followers largely agree with the issues raised in this paper. Since many of the EC's suggestions have been made before by others, it seems that they are only weighing in on a constantly important topic. [[Nigel Roberts]] notes how regrettable the move by [[Peter Dengate Thrush]] was for the organization, and calls on ICANN to address the issues raised in this paper.<ref>[http://nigel.je/ Nigel Roberts' blog, Nigel.je]</ref> One concern raised with this document focuses on tone over content; [[Milton Mueller]] notes that the fact that they are not issuing papers with room for public comments, holding discussions with their European constituents, or officially releasing these documents they are demonstrating their desire to directly manipulate [[ICANN]]'s structure and function.<ref>[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf InternetGovernance.org/blog]</ref>

====Paper 5: A More Effective GAC====

@@ Line 101: / Line 101: @@
 The fourth paper can be read [http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf here].
-ICANN followers largely agree with the issues raised in this paper. One concern raised with this document focuses on tone over content. Since many of the EC's suggestions have been made before by others,  it seems that they are only weighing in on a constantly important topic. [[Nigel Roberts]] notes how regrettable the move by [[Peter Dengate Thrush]] was for the organization, and calls on ICANN to address the issues raised in this paper.<ref>[http://nigel.je/ Nigel Roberts' blog, Nigel.je]</ref> [[Milton Mueller]] notes that the fact that they are not issuing papers with room for public comments, holding discussions with their European constituents, or officially releasing these documents they are demonstrating their desire to directly manipulate [[ICANN]]'s structure and function.<ref>[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf InternetGovernance.org/blog]</ref>
+ICANN followers largely agree with the issues raised in this paper. Since many of the EC's suggestions have been made before by others,  it seems that they are only weighing in on a constantly important topic. [[Nigel Roberts]] notes how regrettable the move by [[Peter Dengate Thrush]] was for the organization, and calls on ICANN to address the issues raised in this paper.<ref>[http://nigel.je/ Nigel Roberts' blog, Nigel.je]</ref> One concern raised with this document focuses on tone over content; [[Milton Mueller]] notes that the fact that they are not issuing papers with room for public comments, holding discussions with their European constituents, or officially releasing these documents they are demonstrating their desire to directly manipulate [[ICANN]]'s structure and function.<ref>[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/pdf/ECPaper3-4.pdf InternetGovernance.org/blog]</ref>
 ====Paper 5: A More Effective GAC====