Re: [wg-c] compromise proposal

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

> 
> 	I'm proposing that, as a compromise, middle-ground recommendation, we
> begin with a first round of 6-10 new gTLDs followed by an evaluation
> period.  This proposal doesn't reflect my personal views (I support a much
> broader rollout).  And many "option two" people will see this as not
> compromise but capitulation.  But I believe that if a critical, central
> mass of the WG is to come to any agreement on the "how many, how fast"
> question, this is about what the agreement will amount to.
> 

I tend to agree with you on this. Did you see you post entitled "back to the
Charter"? 

Brief recap of the relevant points - "Initially, ten new gTLDs
should be deployed through a process similar to the ICANN/NSI/DOC
test-bed. The specific TLDs deployed during this test-bed should be
determined by the registries selected to participate. Terms for
participation should include uniquess of business model, technical
stability of the organization, lack of prior use of the gTLD and a clear
understanding of the long term dynamics that the process implies.
After the test phase, new gTLDs should be deployed as quickly as a sane
and reasonable process for deployment allows."

The key difference here is that the initial rollout *is* the evaluation -
then again, that is probably not a difference, but a semantic...

--
Ross Wm. Rader
Director, eCommerce
TUCOWS.com Inc.
t. 416.239.9095 x 335
f. 416.239.8409