<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ICA to ICANN Ombudsman: &#8220;Tardy, Nonresponsive and Non-Persuasive&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://domainnamewire.com/2009/06/15/ica-to-icann-ombudsman-tardy-nonresponsive-and-non-persuasive/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/06/15/ica-to-icann-ombudsman-tardy-nonresponsive-and-non-persuasive/</link>
	<description>News and Views for the Domain Name Industry</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2012 04:15:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: M. Menius</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/06/15/ica-to-icann-ombudsman-tardy-nonresponsive-and-non-persuasive/comment-page-1/#comment-421833</link>
		<dc:creator>M. Menius</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:43:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=6867#comment-421833</guid>
		<description>@Andrew - &quot;it certainly seems that the question of whether or not IRT is a constituent body was largely avoided&quot;

This is one of my chief criticisms of ICANN having arisen out of 2+ years of attempts to engage them in dialogue over several key issues. ICANN are adept at talking loosely around an issue without actually answering questions directly or making their exact position known.

When called on this, ICANN filibuster. Or, quickly go on the offensive with inane ramblings about the need for constituents to &quot;get involved&quot;. Credibility is rapidly slipping with such responses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Andrew &#8211; &#8220;it certainly seems that the question of whether or not IRT is a constituent body was largely avoided&#8221;</p>
<p>This is one of my chief criticisms of ICANN having arisen out of 2+ years of attempts to engage them in dialogue over several key issues. ICANN are adept at talking loosely around an issue without actually answering questions directly or making their exact position known.</p>
<p>When called on this, ICANN filibuster. Or, quickly go on the offensive with inane ramblings about the need for constituents to &#8220;get involved&#8221;. Credibility is rapidly slipping with such responses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Latest Domainer News</title>
		<link>http://domainnamewire.com/2009/06/15/ica-to-icann-ombudsman-tardy-nonresponsive-and-non-persuasive/comment-page-1/#comment-528612</link>
		<dc:creator>Latest Domainer News</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:13:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://domainnamewire.com/?p=6867#comment-528612</guid>
		<description>&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_comment&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_twitter_username&quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;topsy_trackback_content&quot;&gt;ICA to ICANN Ombudsman: ?Tardy, Nonresponsive and Non-Persuasive? - http://tinyurl.com/l55pl5&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/span&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div style="background-color: #FFfbd0">
<p><span class="topsy_trackback_comment"><span class="topsy_twitter_username"><span class="topsy_trackback_content">ICA to ICANN Ombudsman: ?Tardy, Nonresponsive and Non-Persuasive? &#8211; <a href="http://tinyurl.com/l55pl5" rel="nofollow">http://tinyurl.com/l55pl5</a></span></span></span></p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

