| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Chat With Esther Dyson Online
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 56 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
1. I fail to see how this is a failing. You are basing this on Stuart Lynn's arbitrary position of allowing sponsored only in the next round. This is a position of dubious merit at best.
2. You make this claim, yet you provide no facts to back it up. How have IOD not proven technical ability? They have a functioning registry. Where is it deficient?
The specific reasons cited in the 2000 evaluation were quite wrong. Andersen's evaluation was shown to be incorrect. The technical evaluation was shown to be incorrect. Compare IOD's application to Afilias's, and you will see that their underlying systems were virtually identical. Ironic, that, as Afilias chose not to implement that system and, instead, implemented a system that did not work.
Your facts are, in short, made up.
Please cite some real ones. I'll even start you off: Is IOD's back-end database deficient in any way? Can their system not handle anticipated load? Do they lack bandwidth? Is their TPM too low? Is their zone server plan lacking in any way?
Come on, just one solid fact, will you?
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| - 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
|
|
|
I agree. But I also viewed the video transcripts of the meeting, and I've spoken to someone from IOD, and it seemed to me that IOD changed this aspect of their application when ICANN said that it was unacceptable. IOD pledged to have registrars straight away. ICANN then dismissed IOD's application as having a substantive change, even though it was for the better, and even though other applicants made changes yet were not disqualified in any way.
It just doesn't make much sense to me when the company that seemed to have started this whole thing is shown the door for no good reason. Perhaps there's something I'm not aware of, having started following this only slightly more than a year ago.
++Peter
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
|
|
Interesting observation. Since you're obviously a legal professional, perhaps you can outline the legal theory under which IOD or any other applicant can sue?
++Peter
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| | | 6 replies beneath your current threshold. |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
Chat With Esther Dyson Online