Re: [wg-c] Eureka?

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@ebarn.com>]

That's ridiculous - bidding on a contract is anything but Marxist. gTLD
registries need to be run in the interests of the internet public - to offer
exclusive rights *and* allow the registry to pick their TLD is insane. Look
at IO...anything, as long as it's .web.

I would like to think that we are beyond Fordisms in this discussion...

-RWR

-----Original Message-----
From: Roeland M.J. Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>
To: Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>; wg-c@dnso.org <wg-c@dnso.org>
Date: Friday, August 06, 1999 2:17 AM
Subject: RE: [wg-c] Eureka?


>I think that this pretty much will kill off the registry business and
>leave it all to NSI and CORE. Frankly, under these rules, NSI would
>probably bail out too. I have no earthly clue as to why CORE would
>continence running a registry under these sorts of conditions.
>
>The problems with this are obvious. They indicate the same myopia that
>Karl Marx had a problem with. Thy ignore the human need for incentive.
>What's the motivation...ego? ... prestige? Neither of them will pay the
>rent, or even buy a cup of coffee.
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On
>> Behalf Of Kent
>> Crispin
>> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 1999 10:47 PM
>> To: wg-c@dnso.org
>> Subject: Re: [wg-c] Eureka?
>
>> In particular, of course, I don't believe ICANN should enable
>> exclusive registries.  Nor do I think that registries should pick
>> their TLDs -- I think that there should be many registries, but that
>> they should  bid to run TLDs with fixed term renewable contracts.
>