Re: [wg-c] Please Explain "No on 1, Yes on 2" (More)

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

John,

A nice piece of writing.

One could reasonably view (my) position as:
	1. opportunistic, and adding to the already quite difficult clutter,
	   and at least positioning "one community" for early access in the
	   next round (see Kent's suggestion in PPD, which I co-signed), or
	2. non-opportunistic, expanding the scope of policy and jurisdiction
	   for TLDs from "none/all" (modern NSI TLDs) and "none/state", to
	   "non-trivial/non-state", e.g., "trademark-lawyers/hell", or
	3. non-opportunistic, expanding the methodology of new TLD evaluation
	   from hypothetical considerations to something as breathtaking as
	   sticking a finger in one's nose and creating one, and iterating
	   this messy act in the belief that improvement will follow, or
	4. only the first of several advocates for competing "Indian" (or
	   marks-lawyers-in-hell) registries.

Where I'd try and change your analysis is on the 4th point, as it isn't, as
Milt in a rare moment on acerbic insight in what is otherwise a lunatic
cyber-charade of the new-tech market, a given that the NAA proposal is not
going to face competition from within what you view as "one community".

Fundamentally, I read your think-piece as assuming that any non-trivial
charter exhausts the policy/scope/business-model of the market, hence that
these really "look like" ccTLDs. Delegate once, forget forever. I don't
think this will prove true.

If you'd like to point out the areas where two extremes of the policy/locality
model differ, I'll be happy to try and suggest how the difference may be the
result of assumptions which may not be true.

It sure beats trying to write intelligently about S/K.

Bret,

The meaning of N/Y/x depends on who's vote you are referring to. Dave and
John mean something quite different from Philip. Dave, John, and others have
voted FOR 6-10 in the past. Philip has voted AGAINST 6-10.

Philip votes against _generic_generic_generic_ gTLDs.
Dave, John, and others vote against _chartered_chartered_chartered_ gTLDs.

Personally I think a lot more of those who vote N.N.x than those who vote
N.Y.x, even though they vote against non-trivial charter in the present.
S/K is pernicious junk, and N.Y.x revisits 6-10, for the 3rd time in as many
months.

Aren't you glad WG-B and the NC dumped Philip on us?

Cheers, 
Eric