Re: [wg-c] non/for profit

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

Caroline,

Another issue with the for-profit model is which policy goal it places
the paramount value upon.

The policy goal of reducing the percentage of registrations in the existing
"generic" TLD registries, independent of the number of registrars, which
NSI ultimately holds as operator of the COM/ORG/NET, is subordinate to some
other policy goal.

The charter of WG-C could be figuring out how to get 50% of the traffic,
using the identical operational model (single registry, one or more TLDs,
and some number of registrars), then figuring out how to get a third and
subsequent process models started with some initial capitalization-in-names
via assignment.

Rather than having already agreed to construct a monster with the intent
of dismantling it as it dismantles NSI to then create plurality (a task
made awkward if the monster to be constructed-then-deconstructed has some
independent duty (RoI maximization) and freedom of agency (legal status)
to execute that duty), we're dorking around with a handful of scabby wee
rodents who swear they've got a breeding program that will do the same
trick in less time, safer, and so on, but about which the details are
unknowable.

As an additional kink, we've got to keep them from scampering over the
edge of American anti-trust cliffs.

In an alternate universe, having already held the lottery and awarded the
Red Cross and Red Crescent societies (why not?) the prime contractor role
last Summer, and picked a couple registrars this Fall, we'd be dorking the
prices and other fungible bits of the problem and selling the idea to the
public that the RED/GREEN/BLUE gTLDs are way cheap, tres cool, effective,
and sound policy -- in the off chance that our dailys would, if we worked
hard enough, and got luck, actually exceed NSI's dailys.

Not that I expect to convince anyone, but which interests are willing to
subordinate, for years if necessary, self-interest to the goal of making
NSI just another ho-hum in the registry racket?

The hundred-flowers school claims their flowers not only grace the eye,
but must come first.

The school for speculators claims their roll of the dice possesses a
mathematical beauty, and also must come first.

Others argue the mystical unity of all things, and that complex ritual
also must come first (No, I don't understand the inner weaving of Milt's
magic carpet, and I can't find a corner of it that doesn't smell like a
spiteful cat hasn't been there first). 

Of course, ICANN actually embarks on a course of action which tends to
effectively displace NSI from its present position of being without any
competition, we can expect that NSI will attempt to set our hair on fire.

This piece of drama was billed as "The King Must Die", but the cast decided
to play it as "The King and a musical-chairs-I", a comedy of revolutionary
manners.

Off hand I don't know why the trademark holders care one way or another,
either about parity with NSI's daily numbers or the abstract question of
which modality is preferable. I expect that you may prefer the fewest
operator model to be selected, for the same reasons you may prefer the
weaker operator model, your policy being applied via operator action.

Cheers,
Eric