[wg-c] Market Research and Public Awareness

["Greg Schuckman" <schuckman@starpower.net>]

Building on Kendall's suggestion for a poll, this was an idea that was
favorably discussed by several registrars in Cairo to both ascertain demand
for new gTLDs as well as which strings would be of the greatest interest to
prospective customers.  Given the difficulty of orchestrating a net-wide Web
poll, however, we might want to ask each ICANN-accredited registrar to place
a graphic on its site that would link to an independent third party (polling
firm) in a pop-up window asking some basic questions about what strings they
like as well as what string they would like to have if their choice isn't
listed.  If you wanted to augment the sample to include participants beyond
those who are already trying to register a domain name (or at least
considering it), then the polling firm can conduct a net-wide Web poll using
statistical sampling (Harris Interactive in NYC is one such firm capable of
doing this) which would allow us to look at the results with and without the
data gained from the "at-large" community.  Addressing Mr. Walsh's quite
valid points about voter fraud, etc., he is quite right that the poll
results could be distorted by those who would seek to abuse the process if
it were limited to voluntary participation.  The data that would be
collected by the polling firm through its sampling, however, would not be
corrupted since they are good at preventing things like that.  Personally,
in spite of the limitations, I like the idea of having the two sets of data
because it could tell us something about the opinions of the "at-large"
community on the issue of expanding namespace as well as what current
registrants (or to-be-registrants) want today.

Should the DNSO support the idea for such a poll, we would be able to
conduct the market research that is sorely needed on the subject of new
gTLDs (demand, preferred strings, etc...) but would be able to establish
credibility for the results since we would have a reputable third party as
the host of the poll as well as being responsible for its tabulation.  Given
 the impact that any decision about new gTLDs will have not only on
e-commerce but on how the public begins to understand the possibilities that
expanded namespace could have, it seems prudent for us to proceed apace with
the suggestion and be able to share the results headed into Yokohama.

Related to my support for this poll, if I had one criticism to date of ICANN
and its various constituencies, it would be the dearth of public
information/education that has been produced about what ICANN is, what
decisions it must make, and most importantly, how those decisions will
affect people's lives.  That we may spring the idea of new gTLDs on the
public without their being made aware of who made those decisions and why,
as well as what else may be coming down the pike with respect to this
mysterious thing we call the Internet, will only invite greater suspicion
and confusion about what ICANN has been doing for the last 16 months, no
matter how open and transparent it strives to be.  Being 'open and
transparent' when you are largely invisible to the world doesn't mean much
now does it?

I look forward to your thoughts.

Sincerely,

Greg Schuckman
wg-c in w-dc

----- Original Message -----
From: Kendall Dawson <kendall@motif1.obs-us.com>
To: <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2000 12:03 PM
Subject: [wg-c] re: Choosing the intial testbed


> I agree that it should be decentralized - but not in the exact way that
James has proposed.
>
> My person feeling is that the general public should choose the
TLDs/registry by a vote. It seems the only democratic way to do this. Rather
than telling people -- "here are the 10 choices" why not have a Net-wide Web
poll (sponsored by DNSO) to decide this matter?
>
> This way ICANN gets the general public involved, the business/commercial
interest does not get to make the choice for the public - and no one can
come back later complaining - "we weren't offered any choice".
>
> This method could be used whether the registries are chosen first, or the
TLD strings are chosen first. If the registries are asked to apply first -
we offer a list of say 100 registries and the string they propose to run.
The public then votes on these - and the top 10 are implemented.
>
> If we go the other route - and the TLD strings are chosen first - we put
up a list of 100 strings. The public votes on which ones they want. The top
10 are chosen. Then, the registries bid on who will run them.
>
> I know that Paul already has a poll going over at Name-Space. But, this is
not "officially sanctioned" by DNSO. If ICANN were to offer something
similar to this as an "official" poll that will used to gauge the interests
of the public -- we could avoid a lot of the back-and-forth fighting of
which ones to add.
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> Kendall
>
>
> On 22-Mar-2000 James Love wrote:
> ---------------------------
>  > I propose the decision making be decentralized.  I would recommend 3 be
>  > selected by the business/registrar constituencies, 3 by the
>  > non-commercial domain holders, and 3 selected by the ICANN at large
>  > members, in an online vote.  That's 9, and the 10th could be selected
in
>  > some other way.  Perhaps a lottery by those with "pioneer" proposals,
or
>  > something else.  This would provide a simple way to reduce the power
>  > that any one group would have, and it would probably also lead to some
>  > diversity in the types of management structures considered in the first
>  > round.
>