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

["Mark C. Langston" <skritch@home.com>]

On 16 July 1999, Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com> wrote:
>
>I can't speak for Javier, but my position is *not* a rehash of the 
>IAHC proposal.  Instead it is based on current realities -- those 
>names have worldwide recognition -- far more than *any* other 
>proposed TLDs.  Despite what you say, they have a lengthy public 
>process behind them.  And, if CORE cooperates, they give us a very 
>clean slate from an IP conflict point of view.

Worldwide recognition?  What world do you live in, Kent?  Stop any
average net user and ask them.  Most of them couldn't name more than
one ccTLD, much less these trademarked CORE TLDs.

Once more, I ask you to STOP posturing and protryaing your ideas 
as though they carried the weight of some silent majority (in this
case, recognition by some ill-defined, vague set of people called
"the world").

What you can legitimately say is that they are recognized by those
who are familiar with the arguments for and against them within
CORE/IAHC.  In which case, there's strong points to be made on
either side of the issue.


>
>These are objective, concrete advantages.  I realize that there will 
>be some individuals that will have emotional problems with this, and 
>will doubtless scream very loud, but that's fundamentally childish.  

Kent, are you implying that anyone that has the gall do diasgree
with out over this is being immature?

>Furthermore, I am perfectly willing to consider other names -- I 
>would just like to see their objective advantages discussed.

Your political maneuvering will not no unchallenged, Kent.  

-- 
Mark C. Langston	     			Let your voice be heard:
mark@bitshift.org				     http://www.idno.org
Systems Admin					    http://www.icann.org
San Jose, CA					     http://www.dnso.org