Re: [wg-c-1] Next question: Which gTLDs? How many?

["Christopher Ambler" <cambler@iodesign.com>]

> I personally think that it should be the community to choose. Otherwise
all
> new gTLDs would only be oriented to "be sold" and not to serve the
> community. gTLDs such as ".arts" which may add much more richness to the
> name space will not be added, because others may bring in more money.

The community does't get to choose the make of cars available every
year. The community doesn't get to choose the router configuration of
ISPs. The community doesn't get to choose the player roster of their
local sports teams.

If you truly want a community choice, then you must hold a vote of the
ENTIRE community. To claim that we few on these lists get to choose
the TLDs for the whole internet is an arrogant presumption.

To claim that we get to choose the TLDs that the companies who
become new registries and registrars will run, and not those
companies themselves is just as arrogant.

What if we select .ATT? What if we select .MCI? What if we
select .WEB? All of them are protected by trademark, and I would
wager that 2 of the companies that own trademark protection on
them are interested in running a registry. Possibly all three.

Again - select reasonable and objective criteria to be a registry,
stage entry into the root so that it's slow and steady, watch for
problems, and let the market solve itself. If a company selects
a TLD that the community doesn't want, it won't sell many
registrations. That's a market economy taking care of itself.

I strongly suspect that once a registry meets the criteria, it will
poll the community on its own so as to select a TLD that is
wanted. Anything less is simply bad business.

But it's not up to us to impose that upon the new registries.

Christopher