[NA-Discuss] Regional Advice on .HEALTH Objection

[Avri Doria]

Hi,

I have read through the applications and comments at this point. I think I managed to find it all.

I find it unfortunate that none of the applications was for a community application that might have been in a position to offer a TLD that would have been safe for consumers of medical information to use.

I also find it unfortunate that none of the applicants has taken advantage of the  opportunity of offering a PIC and an application change to offer significant protections in response to the few comments that were received and recognizing the concerns of WHO as indicated in their letter.

And finally, I find it unfortunate that the previous supported sTLD applicant did not resubmit.  As I understand their situation, ICANN had been definitive in the closing of that round and in applying a portion of the fee to applications in this round.  I understand and agree that the way that was done was most probably not fair, but it was in the past. I also am somewhat surprised that WHO itself did not submit comments in regard to these application and their community status - a letter to the Board on the day before applications where scheduled to close is not the same thing as it attempts to go around the process and redefine the process for its own purposes. 

Had there been a community application in this round for this term or for a similar term, I would have tended toward supporting that community application by objection.  Additionally, since the community, or a significant portion of that community, did not come together to assert the community's identification with a term and the harm it would suffer, I find it more difficult to support this as a community objection.

Speaking for myself, and only for myself,  I do not beleive that NARALO should support these objection on a community basis.  There may indeed be a case for advice on these gTLD applications, but that is not our call.  I do not see even the broadest community threshold as having been met, as there has been no community statement on the threat to the community posed by these applications.

avri