Re: [wg-c] about the consensus call

[Patrick Greenwell <patrick@stealthgeeks.net>]

On Wed, 15 Mar 2000, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:

> 	Kent argues that one of the difficulties with the consensus-call proposal
> is that it precludes ICANN from considering a proposal for a new gTLD
> charter/string unless that proposal comes from somebody actually seeking to
> run that TLD.  A good idea for a new TLD, he urges, could indeed come from
> just about anybody, and it's arbitrary to say that ICANN can't consider
> such a proposal unless it comes from a would-be "registry."
> 
> 	I think the consensus-call approach has two strengths.  First, I think the
> focus on an *application* process, rather than a process in which ICANN
> simply assembles a list of potential TLDs proposed by the world at large
> and picks its favorites, will induce ICANN to proceed with greater
> procedural regularity

There is no need to follow such a path as I have suggeste previously.
Thus you proceed on a false premise. Let the *COMMUNITY* decide which
strings are most desireable. ICANN then can follow a completely objective
path in TLD selection and placing operation of a given TLD up for bid.


> fewer than the number of new TLDs ) to run them.  The second camp, OTOH,
> views this approach as uncomfortably top-down.  They urge that actual
> registry operators are better equipped than is the ICANN Board to determine
> what new gTLDs consumers actually want, 

ASK THE CONSUMERS WHAT THEY WANT.

> ICANN can't exercise wholly unbounded discretion in picking the 6-10.  That
> sounds right to me: It seems to me that that concern is important.  At the
> same time, as Eric has recently pointed out (and Kent has emphasized
> previously), we haven't in fact made much progress in developing criteria
> that meaningfully limit ICANN's discretion. 

Bull. See above.


/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
                               Patrick Greenwell                          
                       Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/