[ga] Draft issues report on the introduction of new TLDS/Allocation

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

It would certainly appear that disclosure of the inner workings of how ICANN/IANA fulfill the nuts and bolts of their work is what is after here. Not to say it should not be very public. In fact non-transparency as in deals made in hallways instead of full halls has been a large problem.
 
I find the part of this read in the ambiguity section called "Allocation Methods" quite back room filled with cigar smoke oriented; Sec. I  pg.34  par.2&3. Comparaitve evaluation? Beauty Contests? Now reference back to criteria section and you got a whopper of case for asking for bribes by way of donation. It also reminds us of the arbitrary nature back in the dotBIZ era.
e
 

1.      There is a number of allocation methods to choose from and these methods can be grouped into the following categories; sequential or first-come/first-served, random selections in the form of ballots or lotteries, auction models (with increasing or decreasing bidding) and comparative evaluations, commonly known as ?beauty contests?. 

2.      To date, ICANN has only used comparative evaluation methods. These evaluation procedures have differed in the details, by applying different criteria as explained in the selection criteria chapter above.  Evaluations have been performed in different ways; in-house, with mixed teams or by external consultants




		
---------------------------------
 Yahoo! FareChase - Search multiple travel sites in one click.