While I applaud the initiative of starting a long awaited constituency for
registrants, I have to object on some of your remarks.
It is not the Board who "forces" to create separate constituencies. Since
the very beginning of the GNSO Review, as a matter of fact with the
LSE report some 4 years ago, the idea of having separate groups for
commercial and non commercial stakeholder has been introduced. We had
several public comment periods, and several entities working at the GNSO
review: the BGC, the GNSO Review WG, the SIC, the GNSO Implementation
and I am probably even missing one or two. In all this time there has been
virtually no objection to this separation: quite the contrary, it has been
supported strongly, in particular by the non-commercial stakeholders.
The fact of having to separate registrants between commercial and
non-commercial is a simple logical consequence of that choice, supported
over the years, not a trick invented by the ugly and nasty Board.
This said, maybe I am missing something, or have an incorrect picture of
reality, but when I am hearing "commercial individual registrants" my mind
goes to who has as profession to register names. Like, but not limited to,
domainers. And I wonder whether these people have interests that are
to the individuals who register a name for the family web site.
I would suggest an alternative. The charter of a future individual
non-commercial registrant constituency, or interest group, could be
in a way to include, for instance, individual professionals like lawyers
engineers. To be honest, I don't see much difference (and I don't see even
simple way to make the difference without monitoring the web sites)
a site that has the family pictures and a site that advertises an
professional activity in terms of the problems that both have versus UDRP,
registry and registrar policy, etc. Even more, a name can be acquired for
purpose, but the purpose might change or be extended in time. What do we
if a family site shows, together with the pictures of the latest holiday
trip, also the pictures of some objects that will be part of the next
Sunday's garage sale?
I am sure that the NCSG will accept an individual registrant constituency
that includes these kind of use of the name. We have to be reasonable.
all, when we identify organizations as "non-commercial" we do not mean
on their web sites every commercial activity is banned, but that the
organization itself does not have commercial profit as the purpose.
Just throwing in some ideas.
[mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Danny Younger
Sent: Monday, 28 September 2009 21:32
To: GA; Joop Teernstra
Subject: Re: [ga] 8. Registrants representation
Re: We could revive a hack-proof online signup procedure...
In view of the fact that we have an uncaring board that is forcing us
to necessarily create two registrant constituencies (one for the
commercial house and one for the non-commercial house) instead of a
single registrant constituency for our community, could I trouble you
to set up two separate signup procedures, or a single sign-up that
differentiates between commercial and non-commercial?
In the meantime, I'll get working on (1) a website design that will
simultaneously serve both the commercial and non-commercial
considerations;(2) Charter language, and (3) Petition language.