Re: [wg-c] new TLDs

["Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M." <rod@cyberspaces.org>]

Does anyone know whether ICANN provided (or intends to provide) a written
reason to those applicants who were rejected? I am assuming the board took
an up-or-down vote, but I am wondering whether board also intends to attempt
to show the vote was not arbitrary by sending out a written response?

Rod


----- Original Message -----
From: "James Love" <love@cptech.org>
To: "Jonathan Weinberg" <weinberg@mail.msen.com>
Cc: <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 12:04 AM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] new TLDs


> I have recieved some private mail, asking if we were happy with the
> ICANN results, and the answer is no.  Like many others, were were
> disappointed with many of the rejections and many of the comments from
> various board members.  That said, I think that Jonathan and others who
> moved the process forward deserve thanks, and I hope this leads to a
> further expansion of the root.  I thought it was interesting how close
> the numbers came to the 6 to 10 from the WG-C report.   We'd like to see
> thousands added, and I imagine these will lead to a much greater number
> down the road.  I hope so.  I feel badly for those who paid the $50k and
> were rejected on very arbitrary grounds.
>
>  Jamie
>
>
> On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, James Love wrote:
>
> > Kudos really to Jonathan, and in its own way, ICANN seems to be doing
> > the Working Group C report.  Jamie
> >
> >
> > On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
> >
> > > The ICANN Board just approved seven new TLDs:  BIZ (JVTeam), INFO
> > > (Afilias), NAME (Global Name Registry), PRO (RegistryPro), MUSEUM
(MDMA),
> > > AERO (SITA), and COOP (NCDA).  Kudos to all who helped to bring this
> > > about.
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Jonathan Weinberg
> > > weinberg@msen.com
> > >
> >
> >
>
> --
> --------------------------
> James Love, Consumer Project on Technology, http://www.cptech.org
> love@cptech.org, v. 1.202.387.8030, f 1.202.234.5176
>
>