[ga] Re: [ga-org] Re: Outline of proposed consensus points

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

Hello Jeff,

Sunday, June 24, 2001, 10:32:00 PM, Jeff Williams wrote:

> Milton and all,

> Milton Mueller wrote:

>> OUTLINE OF PROPOSED CONSENSUS POINTS
>>
>> 1. The Noncommercial Domain Name Holders Constituency
>> has a greater stake in the future of ORG than any
>> other DNSO constituency.

>   This is most likely true.

No it's not.  The ones with the most stake are the 6,000,000
registrants with domain names delegated under an unrestricted policy,
who would be grossly effected by any change in policy even if they are
grandfathered in.

Any change in policy after so many years would be unconscionable in
the harm it would cause to them.

>>
>> 2. The Policy Authority for the ORG domain should be a
>> new entity formed by members of the NCDNHC.

>   I don't think this is wise or reasonable...

I agree.

>>
>> 3. We oppose any evictions or refusals to renew names
>> currently registered in ORG.

>   Agreed here.

Of course, since no policy change should occur, there should be no
evictions.

>>
>>
>> 4. We favor maintaining the noncommercial identity of
>> ORG by revising its marketing and promotion strategies
>> to target noncommercial users, and to discourage
>> duplicate, pre-emptive registrations by businesses.


There is no non-commercial identity.  For YEARS this domain has had an
unrestricted charter.  Any "non-commercial identity" was a falacious
assumption.  With over 6,000,000 registered names under an open
unrestricted policy, it is not appropriate to consider changing the
policy.

If the NCDNHC wants to create an application for a new TLD for
non-commercial purposes, they would have my complete support.

>>
>>
>> 5. We consider individuals, households, and
>> unincorporated organizations engaged in primarily non-
>> commercial forms of expression as an appropriate
>> market for ORG.

Sure they are.  As are commercial organizations engaged in commercial
activities.  There are, and should be, no restrictions at all.


>> 8. We favor the creation of new, "clean slate" TLDs
>> that can be carefully restricted to specific classes
>> of non-profit organizations, but we do not think this
>> is an appropriate policy for ORG.

>   Agreed of course...


But you see fit to harm over 6,000,000 registrants whose existing
investments in .org domain names that were registered under an open
and unrestricted charter by restricting future use by future
registrants, thus harming the nature of their investments by the
public assumption that their use is a non-approved use now, even if
they are exempt the public impression alone would be harmful to them.

-- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
Userfriendly.com Domains
The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
DNS Services from $1.65/mo

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html