RE: [wg-c] WG questions

[Ivan Pope <ivan@netnames.com>]

I also agree with this approach and have said as much. I think our aim
should be to set out the transparent rules by which names can be created. We
had better get creative about this soon or we will get nowhere.
If we just create a structure whereby proposals for new gTLDs get passed up
and down a chain of committees, we will never get any new gTLDs, and the
world will be a poorer place.
Ivan

> >I'd like to suggest that we lean towards the second 
> approach.  Requiring
> >every new TLD and its affiliated registry to go through a 
> WG, the Names
> >Council and the ICANN Board, I suspect, will be a slow 
> process that, in the
> >highly politicized and contentious gTLD context, will maximize
> >opportunities for lobbying, political considerations, 
> obstruction, and
> >hidden bias and arbitrariness.  If we want it to be easy to 
> accredit new
> >gTLD/registries, it seems to me, ICANN should set out the 
> governing rules
> >at the outset so that its actual approval process can be 
> largely mechanical
> >rather than discretionary.  Am I wrong about this?
> 
> I couldn't agree more, nor could I have said it better myself.
> 
> Christopher
> 
> 
>