Re: [ga] PLEASE COMMENT: Suggested ALAC response to sTLD RFP

[Eric Dierker <eric@xxxxxxxxxx>]

There is criminal intent here and some should examine their motives.
RICO is not a game and TR should be mindful.
e

> George and all former DNSO GA members,
> 
>   I can see from the links you so kindly provided that
>some comments are missing from
>http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/new-gtlds/ to which I had sent in two
>postings.
> 
>   In any event I agree that there are likely enough TLD's now for
> most stakeholders/users purposes.   But that is really not the
> point, is it?  The actual number or type of TLD's should be
> determined by what the market place will bare of support
> as per the stakeholders/users. So I don't think we know how
> many that is or what *Type* those potential TLD's are.
> 
>   What I DO know is that is that the ALAC cannot and does
> not speak for the stakeholders/users legitimately and that our
> members are supportive of many more new gTLD's as well
> as cTLD's that have no encumbrance as to registry or
> registrar management dictated by ICANN without a vote
> by any and all interested parties and/or participating
>stakeholders/users.
> 
>  George Kikos wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think that responppse would have greater legitimacy if it was
>> written AFTER widespread discussions, and not before. I don't see much
>> discussion at:
>>
>> http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/
>> http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/new-gtlds/ (1 post, May 2003)
>> http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/general/ (1 post, April 2003)
>> http://forum.icann.org/alac-forum/misc/ (5 of the 10 by "Jeff
>> Williams", so you know how little that means)
>>
>> Why doesn't the ALAC lead discussions on the GA list, which has been
>> active in the past on numerous issues?
>>
>> If conference calls have been taking place, shouldn't those be
>> recorded and turned into MP3 files? (sorry if I missed links to any
>> past ones)
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> George Kirikos
>> http://www.kirikos.com/
>>
>> P.S. My position would be that no new TLDs be added, until such time
>> as the success/failure of the prior ones has been determined.
>> Personally, I think there are more than enough TLDs already (and
>> ccTLDs)... If there are going to be new ones, they should be greatly
>> differentiated from existing ones, instead of 'clones' that attempt to
>> basically siphon demand from .com (i.e. .web, new.net and other
>> pretenders). Or if they are clones, should propose greatly reduced
>> pricing for the benefit of registrants (which you won't see if you're
>> simply auctioning off the TLDs, as then the incentives are to maximize
>> profits once one obtains the license). .com's registry operation would
>> ideally be up for tender at some point, too, in order to reduce costs
>> to registrants.
>>
>> More thought should be given to the needs of individual registrants,
>> the ultimate consumers of TLDs, and not just the
>> registry/registrar/ICANN staff (i.e. all the extra "make work"
>> projects and worldwide travel in evaluating TLD proposals) as
>> beneficiaries.
>>
>> --- Thomas Roessler <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > The ALAC is soliciting comments on this until September 7.  Feel
>> > free to comment either to this list or to forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > --
>> > Thomas Roessler                            
>> > <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Forwarded message from Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx> -----
>> >
>> > From: Wendy Seltzer <wendy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> > To: Interim ALAC <alac@xxxxxxxxx>
>> > Date: Sun, 24 Aug 2003 10:35:02 -0700
>> > Subject: [alac] Suggested response to sTLD RFP
>> > X-Spam-Level:
>> >
>> > is attached (RTF) and below.  This is meant to reflect ALAC
>> > conversations and discussions on our conference calls and on-list.
>> > Thoughts?
>> >
>> > Thanks.
>> > --Wendy
> 
> Regards,
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 131k members/stakeholders strong!)
> "Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
>     Pierre Abelard
> ===============================================================
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Contact Number: 214-244-4827 or 214-244-3801