RE: [wg-c] application documents requirements

["William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On 17-Mar-2000 Rick H Wesson wrote:
> as for "shaired" I think there certainly is consesnus that there should
> be a model for "registrars" to participate and that the Registry is not
> a registrar and certainly not the sole registrar for the proposed gTLD.

Consensus from where, Rick?    It certainly has not been a consensus point
here.  There is no consensus any of the points raised in the paragraphs above
that I have seen.   I would certainly take exception to this model being forced
onto every gTLD.  It is an unnecessary restriction of business model that ICANN
has no place putting into effect, and there are plenty of disadvantages to this
kind of forced business model.
 
> now, would you mind commenting on the utility of the other points in my
> outline.

This is the point I take the most contention with.  It's the one I will cover. 
Maybe others will address the rest.

- --
William X. Walsh <william@userfriendly.com>
http://userfriendly.com/
Fax: 877-860-5412 or +1-559-851-9192
GPG/PGP Key at http://userfriendly.com/wwalsh.gpg
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1c (Mandrake Linux)
Comment: Userfriendly Networks http://www.userfriendly.com/

iD8DBQE40di28zLmV94Pz+IRAvGnAKDpaUNx/bofauRsGMxd+jL/YyZytgCguJjy
rmx0wwuYsDrD1xFHCSP7u0s=
=fb7P
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----