Re: [wg-c] Straw Vote

[John Charles Broomfield <jbroom@manta.outremer.com>]

Hi Milton,

> The exclusivity [between options 1 & 2 in Question ONE of the straw poll]
> is not absolute, black and white, but it really does
> constitute an important and meaningful choice.
> 
> I hope you can give us a clearer indication of where you stand.

I thought I explained it well in the comment. Obviously not. :-)

If the question is "How many gTLDs and how fast", my position would be
something between 200 and 2000. I can't personally see the nedd for more
than that unless we were to consider company specific TLDs (f.e. ".aol" or
".ibm"), in which case we'd need to be able to scale to many millions (like
".com" today), and we'd actually have gone around a full circle bringing us
back to the problem that we have today.
I would argue that a go slow approach would be best, as the new dynamics of
adding TLDs under the conditions I later mentioned (cost recovery registry,
mandated sharing, etc) nearly oblige for it.
So, add a few to start with (1-10 maybe?), see how that works, and then come
up to speed. Maybe a second addition of 50-100, then a whole bunch, and then
probably stop right there. All over the course of maybe 3 years or so.
Just personal opinions.
Hope I'm clearer now.

Yours, John.