ICANNWatch
 
  Inside ICANNWatch  
Submit Story
Home
Lost Password
Preferences
Site Messages
Top 10 Lists
Latest Comments
Search by topic

Our Mission
ICANN for Beginners
About Us
How To Use This Site
ICANNWatch FAQ
Slash Tech Info
Link to Us
Write to Us

  Useful ICANN sites  
  • ICANN itself
  • Bret Fausett's ICANN Blog
  • Internet Governance Project
  • UN Working Group on Internet Governance
  • Karl Auerbach web site
  • Müller-Maguhn home
  • UDRPinfo.com;
  • UDRPlaw.net;
  • CircleID;
  • LatinoamerICANN Project
  • ICB Tollfree News

  •   At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN  
  • icannatlarge.com;
  • Noncommercial Users Constituency of ICANN
  • NAIS Project
  • ICANN At Large Study Committee Final Report
  • ICANN (non)Members page
  • ICANN Membership Election site

  • ICANN-Related Reading
    Browse ICANNWatch by Subject

    Ted Byfied
    - ICANN: Defending Our Precious Bodily Fluids
    - Ushering in Banality
    - ICANN! No U CANN't!
    - roving_reporter
    - DNS: A Short History and a Short Future

    David Farber
    - Overcoming ICANN (PFIR statement)

    A. Michael Froomkin
    - When We Say US™, We Mean It!
    - ICANN 2.0: Meet The New Boss
    - Habermas@ discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace
    - ICANN and Anti-Trust (with Mark Lemley)
    - Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA & the Constitution (html)
    - Form and Substance in Cyberspace
    - ICANN's "Uniform Dispute Resolution Policy"-- Causes and (Partial) Cures

    Milton Mueller
    - Ruling the Root
    - Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP
    - Dancing the Quango: ICANN as International Regulatory Regime
    - Goverments and Country Names: ICANN's Transformation into an Intergovernmental Regime
    - Competing DNS Roots: Creative Destruction or Just Plain Destruction?
    - Rough Justice: A Statistical Assessment of the UDRP
    - ICANN and Internet Governance

    David Post
    - Governing Cyberspace, or Where is James Madison When We Need Him?
    - The 'Unsettled Paradox': The Internet, the State, and the Consent of the Governed

    Jonathan Weinberg
    - Sitefinder and Internet Governance
    - ICANN, Internet Stability, and New Top Level Domains
    - Geeks and Greeks
    - ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy

    Highlights of the ICANNWatch Archive
    (June 1999 - March 2001)


     
    This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
    Thoughts on those Empty Seats | Log in/Create an Account | Top | 18 comments | Search Discussion
    Click this button to post a comment to this story
    The options below will change how the comments display
    Threshold:
    Check box to change your default comment view
    The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
    Re: Thoughts on those Empty Seats
    by Anonymous on Monday November 04 2002, @02:50PM (#9985)
    "You imply that they should have known ahead of time that they were not going to get them. How might they have known that?"

    1) a clear, concise set of evaluation guidelines to gain entry was not part of the first round process. These were not stated upfront. These still do not exist today. (i.e. no determinable way to "get them").

    2) setting a limit of 7 - 10 means it is more reasonable than not that the process would produce applicants that would not gain entry for no determinable reason at all. Considering there are fees involved including an investment in time and other resources likely triple the application fee itself, many prospective applicants likely considered participation under such parameters as a below average business decision and therefore did not apply (no determinable way to be one of the finite few that "gets them").

    If anything, the parameters of the first round process did everything possible to dictate an applicant would NOT get one. And they still received 44 applications from interested parties. Amazing.

    These parameters were deemed "ok" because it was the first test in a new environment never before tested and thus a proof of concept that would allow data analyzation and the corresponding effects upon the root server structure. There were going to be "losers" even "qualified losers" for reasons of conservative stability. This was a known constant upfront by both those that chose to apply and those that chose not to. Personally speaking, I think one of the big misnomers is that all parties of interest actually applied. My feeling is that the most qualified of applicants examined the conditions and chose to pass (these would be the ones that knew - or reasoned - they would not "get them")

    ICANN stated a need to preserve stability under the strictest sense of the word and the community compromised by allowing a subjectively unfair process that 2 years later is no closer to the consumer benefits provided by competition than before the first round took place. But to imply that an applicant of the first could not determine ahead that they would not be accepted is an entirely false statement and in fact was an absolute condition for its existence.

    Ray
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
    Re: Thoughts on those Empty Seats by Anonymous
    Re: Thoughts on those Empty Seats
    by PeterBarron (pebarron@hotmail.com) on Tuesday November 05 2002, @05:15AM (#9991)
    User #3240 Info | http://www.icannwatch.org/
    Your arguments imply that most applicants should have known that the odds were long. But not that they should have been certain that they would not win.

    I call your attention to the applications turned down because the board didn't like the way the name sounded, because the facts were deliberately misrepresented, because board members admitted prejudice towards the applicant, or because the board admitted after the fact that it wouldn't consider telephony applications.

    These applicants were turned down for reasons that one might argue are actionable.

    They certainly should not have expected a fair process to turn out as it did.

    ++Peter
    [ Reply to This | Parent ]
  • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.

  • Search ICANNWatch.org:


    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