Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz contract

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Pretty much my top 6 are tld issues. I leave more technical issues to those
who are more technically inclined. There are social issues I could add to
the list, but wanted to make a short list.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Veni Markovski" <veni@xxxxxxxx>
To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "Veni
Markovski" <veni@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 3:41 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz
contract


> Chris,
> these are important issues, and there are more. I've been responding
> to some of your questions on my blog and in the public meetings.
> I see that you are limiting important issues only to the TLDs, except
> point 6, which is again related to TLDs:)
>
> I have more issues, which I find important, but again now is time to
> work, so perhaps at the end of the week!
>
> best,
> Veni
>
> At 01:53 PM 07.8.2006 '?.'  -0400, kidsearch wrote:
> >Then what do you think of creating working groups on particular issues.
And
> >what issues do you think are the most important to address?
> >
> >Here are a few I deem important.
> >
> >1. Creation of a true nonprofit TLD strictly for nonprofit orgs with
> >regulations as such.
> >2. Creation of sTLDs that will reduse the number of trademark
infringements
> >and arbitrations.
> >3. Creation of commercially viable tlds vs the dot aero and dot museum
type.
> >4. How many new TLDs should be approved and why.
> >5. Monetized domain names and now even entire TLDs and how to stop domain
> >tasting.
> >6. Price restrictions and other registrar/registry contract issues.
> >
> >Thats my top 6. I'm sure others could add to that list with no problem.
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Veni Markovski" <veni@xxxxxxxx>
> >To: <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 1:37 PM
> >Subject: Re: [ga] FW: Fee for disproportionate deletes in proposed .biz
> >contract
> >
> >
> > > At 01:20 PM 07.8.2006 '?.'  -0400, kidsearch wrote:
> > > >It is only the semantics that I worry about Veni. Sometimes you cloud
the
> > > >question, sort of answering a question with a question, or shifting
> > > >responsibility away so you don't need to answer.
> > > >
> > > >Not attacking you Veni. As I said, at least you are here. Whether we
> >agree
> > > >on issues or not, its nice that at least one board member is here to
take
> > > >the heat.
> > >
> > > As I wrote a minute ago - I don't mind you, or anyone on this list
> > > "attacking" me. I don't accept this as an attack. Karl was right in
> > > some of his points, but I believe they were written on the ground of
> > > misunderstanding me, and my actions as director. You see, the fact
> > > that I do not say in this list what I think or what I do on some
> > > issues, related to ICANN, does not mean I don't say it or I don't
> > > think it in other lists, or on my blog.
> > >
> > > I'd be eager to see some substential contribution, discussing the
> > > real issues confronting ICANN, and more generally - the Internet
> > > community - before the end of the year. We have the IANA, the MoU,
> > > the IGF, the ITU meeting - to name just four that matter to ICANN.
> > >
> > > veni
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > > Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 8/5/06
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.394 / Virus Database: 268.10.7/410 - Release Date: 8/5/06
>
>