Re: [wg-c] Well, maybe this won't work

[Jonathan Weinberg <weinberg@mail.msen.com>]

	Glad to get the encouragement.  :-)  It's still the case, though, that ten
people have posted messages to the list expressing support for the
compromise proposal and seven people have posted messages expressing
opposition.  That's not even close to an indication of possible rough
consensus; it doesn't, to my mind, justify a formal consensus call.  If the
proposal is to get anywhere, it's going to need a heftier
support-to-opposition ratio than it's gotten so far.

	There are about 70 people on this list, and fewer than 20 have expressed a
view on this.  Is there anyone else out there willing to share a view on
the compromise proposal (pro or con)?

Jon


Jonathan Weinberg
co-chair, WG-C
weinberg@msen.com



At 07:53 PM 9/8/99 -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
>Whoa, nelly.
>I have been out of access and unable to respond to your Saturday 4
September message.
>As a firm option 2 supporter, I thought I had made it clear that I had no
serious
>objection to your compromise proposal if we were talking about 6-10 new
registries
>rather than just 6-10 new gTLDs.
>
>After further reflection, I have less fear of an "evaluation" period
because the idea
>that adding 10 new gTLDs is going to raise significant operational
problems is pure
>FUD and always has been. Therefore if ICANN fails to continue adding new
gTLDs after a
>defined evaluation period, it will be subject to antitrust liability as
well as
>general opprobrium in the Internet community.
>
>So add the bloody 6-10 registries/TLDs, have a nice short evaluation
period and let's
>move on.
>
>Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
>
>>         After today's flurry of messages, I took another look at where
things
>> stand regarding my compromise proposal.  Eight people have posted messages
>> supporting the proposal so far.  All of that support has come from folks
>> who either voted for option one in Question One of the straw poll, or who
>> voted for "neither/both."  (Indeed, the proposal has the support of a
>> majority of the "neither/both" crowd.)  The proposal, OTOH, is
>> conspicuously lacking in support from two groups. On one side, it has drawn
>> opposition from Marilyn, Caroline, Petter, Rita, and Keith, as well as Bill
>> and Annie — all of whom see it as insufficiently controlled.  On the other
>> hand, it has drawn no formal support from *any* of the people who voted for
>> option two in Question One of the straw poll (except me).  I gather that in
>> the absence of any sign of willingness to compromise from the other side,
>> these folks see no percentage in backing down from their view that 6-10 new
>> gTLDs in the initial rollout is far too *few*.
>>
>>         I had hoped that enough people in the center could rally round a
centrist,
>> compromise  position, that it wouldn't matter that there were holdouts on
>> either side. In the face of this opposition, though, eight people humming
>> in favor just won't do it.  Unless we get a strong surge of support for the
>> proposal now, I'll conclude that it's not going anywhere.  I'm fresh out of
>> ideas for forging consensus — anybody else have any?
>>
>> Jon
>>
>> Jonathan Weinberg
>> co-chair, WG-C
>> weinberg@msen.com
>
>
>
>--
>m i l t o n   m u e l l e r // m u e l l e r @ s y r . e d u
>syracuse university          http://istweb.syr.edu/~mueller/
>
>
>
>
>
>