| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Steve Crocker on New TLDs
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 37 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
Mr. Hudgens says: "IOD's application clearly stated what it would do to ensure a smooth entry. I have no reason specific to IOD not to believe it, do you?"
The registries for .info, .biz, and .pro also promised a "smooth entry" ... and of course that turned out to be a big joke, a fraud perpetrated on domain name consumers. You may not have specific reasons not to believe IOD's application, but the fact is, more than just promises should be required. We know ICANN does not enforce agreements/contracts with registries and registrars. Any applicant could promise anything, fail to deliver as promised, and suffer no consequences other than gain the mistrust of domain buyers.
Mr. Hudgens says: "Indeed, IOD has been penalized far too long for not marching to ICANN's beat."
Unfortunately, marching to ICANN's beat goes part-and-parcel with successfully applying for a new TLD, in case you hadn't noticed. IOD's customers have suffered, not just IOD.
Mr. Hudgens says: "To apply Afilias' and Neulevel's waywardness to any other applicant is guilt by association, and is unfair in the extreme."
It may be unfair to TLD applicants, but not to domain consumers. Better regulation is required before risking the addition of more unaccountable registries.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:I guess news travels slowly in ICANN
by Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
Again, Afilias' corruption was evident long before ICANN awarded them .info. It didn't take a genius to predict what would happen. IOD has shown none of this corruption -- this, I think, is a very important point to consider.
I don't know that we are too far apart on the issue of ICANN oversight. But you are exactly right when you say a company that fails to live up to its promises would gain the distrust of its consumers. This is as it should be, and would sovle this issue completely were consumers able to go elsewhere...but they can't, can they? Ideally, ICANN would step in at some point, but in the end the market will take care of that company.
Am I proposing a free-for-all approach? No, I certainly am not. This system isn't perfect, and never will be. This is a lot like saying DOC is corrupt, so therefore we can't have any new businesses until we solve the DOC corruption issue.
At what point do we judge ICANN competent enough to consider applicants fairly? This is an important question, for if you are proposing we all sit idly by until ICANN gets its act together, somebody better be willing to establish some measure by which we know its time for more TLDs. Otherwise the entire issue becomes horribly subjective and impossible to resolve.
A final point: What this business sector needs is some non-shady, technically-adept, popular-product-wielding company to set some sort of standard. ICANN simply isn't going to do that. If enough of these companies emerge, ICANN will take its proper place in the dust bin of really bad ideas.
Shelby Hudgens
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
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
|
