Re: [wg-review] Re(2): [cctld-discuss] Comments on review of DNSOby Mr Park

[Michael Sondow <msondow@iciiu.org>]

Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

> Let take the new gTLDs example.

As an example of what?

> After five or six years of a long
> and passionate debates and fights in favor or against the opening
> of new gTLDs, and challenging the dot COM, the Working Group C got
> a very difficult task. Jonathan Weinberg deserves a gratitude for
> leading that group and publishing an apparently tiny compromise
> "there should be new gTLDs, 6 to 10 in a start up".

That was the proposal of the gTLD/MoU/IAHC four years ago. To you,
Weinberg repeating the same proposal is some kind of achievement?

> The WG-C document
> was subsequently considered and endorsed by the Names Council
> and its recommendation forwarded to the ICANN Board. Everybody
> was exhausted and the work was not terminated: no specifications,
> no selection process defined, no criteria.

Since they hadn't done anything, what were they exhausted from?

> All the above was left
> to the ICANN Staff, which made the work as good as possible for
> the first selection of 7 gTLDs in Marina del Rey.

The selection of new gTLDs was done in a random, ill-thought-out,
irrational manner, by what appears to have been a bunch of
spaced-out zombies. The satire on it at
http://www.satirewire.com/news/0011/new_domains.shtml is - I am told
by someone who was there - very close to the truth.

> There will be other new gTLDs.

To be run by CORE and their friends, like the first seven?

> The terms of reference for a call
> for proposals could be revisited now by the DNSO using the year 2000 first
> experience

What does "terms of reference" mean? Is this some kind of newspeak
to cover up the fact that you're feeding us a scam?

> a set of specifications for running a TLD is needed,
> as well as selection criteria.

Yes, selection criteria would be nice. It always helps to have
selection criteria when you're doing a selection.

> All such documents shall be translated
> to five or six languages and published well in advance, six months
> prior to the next call for proposals seems appropriate.

Make sure you get the "." and the "," in the right place in $50,000.
(or will it be $100,000.?) when you translate them.

> It could
> be suggested than an external consultant making a comparative study
> be from different countries

That should be easy. Just call on the CORE and ISOC people from
around the world to do it.

> it will bring more fairness, or perception
> of fairness, into international competition.

That's what we need, more "perception of fairness" in international
competition. It's the only way of avoiding international
competition.

> Such a comparative
> study shall be translated into several languages, it is a feedback
> and an important help in understanding how the ICANN process works.

How will it help? By showing the rest of the world how rigged the
process is?

> I am quite sure that proceeding this way will add a necessary
> strength to ICANN, and its international good reputation.

Ha-ha. It only hurts when I laugh.

M.S.
--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html