Position on ITLDs

  > Dave Morton <Dave.Morton at ecrc.de> writes:
  > 
  > Ok - fine. Perhaps you need to have a new RIPE work item called 
  > "Reeducating the Commission" :-). It would after all be part of the
  > lobbying/training function discussed already by the contributors.

If you mean a "RIPE NCC" work item I was under the impression that this
was exactly what the contributors meeting told me to be very careful
with.  There was certainly no consensus that the NCC should be doing
this and there was consensus that if RIPE wanted to do lobbying and
industry representation per se it should not be done by the NCC but 
seperately in order not to interfere with the NCC's neutrality.  
Hence I have removed activity N.4 in all its generality from the activity 
plan. 

On the other hand the contributors gave the NCC a mandate to speak to
issues directly concerning our activities. Domain names are
somewhat at the fringes there.

Now I certainly sound less pragmatic than at other times. And it worries
me my self to some extent. Where is "go for it not matter what" Daniel? ;-)
But these issues are certainly very political and not important enough
to rush into action.

Daniel