Re: [wg-c] straw poll -- reminder

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Weinberg <weinberg@mail.msen.com>
To: wg-c@dnso.org <wg-c@dnso.org>
Date: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 10:56 PM
Subject: [wg-c] straw poll -- reminder


> I'm away from home, and as a result not as well-organized as I'd
>like to be.  Near as I can tell, the following 24 WG members who have
>posted to the list at least once[*] haven't submitted votes in the straw
>poll:  Dennis Jennings, Kilnam Chon, Daiva Tamulioniene, Eva Frolich,
>Amadeu Abril i Abril, Ivan Pope, Werner Staub, Ross Wm. Rader, Javier
>Sola, John Lewis, Tolga Yurderi, Petter Rindforth, Martin B. Schwimmer,
>Craig Simon, Jeffrey Neuman, Onno Hovers, Keith Gymer, Jim Glanz, Rob
>Hall, Raul Echeberria, Caroline Chicoine, Robert F. Connelly, Anthony
>Lupo, Kathryn Kleiman.
>
> To the extent that any of you *have* voted (but I lost those files
>en route to my mother-in-law's house), please let me know.  For those of
>you who haven't voted, I urge you please to do so now.  You need only send
>in an answer to Question One at this point.  For your convenience, I'm
>reprinting Question One below.
>
>
>QUESTION ONE: HOW MANY NEW gTLDS, AND HOW FAST?
>
>Option 1:  Without regard to whether it would be desirable to have many
>gTLDs in the long term, ICANN should proceed now by adding only a few, and
>then pausing for evaluation.  Only after assessing the results should it
>initiate any action to add more.

No. The seeds we sow today will determine the rewards that we reap
tomorrow. If we cannot achieve consensus on the methodology and process by
which new TLDs are added to the root, then WG-C must declare this and allow
ICANN to determine further action. Acknowledgement of what the consensus is
will allow ICANN to determine what the evaluation criterion is. We can't
mark the test until we figure out what the answers are.

>
>Option 2:  ICANN should implement a plan contemplating the authorization
>of many new gTLDs over the next few years.  (Example: ICANN might plan to
>authorize up to 10-12 new registries, each operating 1-3 new gTLDs, each
>year, for a period of five years; each year's authorizations would be
>staggered over the course of the year.)  This option would place the
>burden on opponents, if evidence comes in demonstrating that additional
>new gTLDs are a bad idea or that the rollout is too fast, to bring that
>evidence to ICANN's attention and call for a halt or a slowdown.
>
>
>-------------------------------
>
>[*] I figure that anybody who hasn't posted to the list even once has
>probably decided that his or her energies are best expended elsewhere.
>
>Jon
>
>
>Jonathan Weinberg
>co-chair, WG-C
>weinberg@msen.com