<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] significant user representation
Ted, I don't remember seeing where Chuck disagrees with you about the ability to comment publicly. Could you provide a quote on that?
----- Original Message -----
From: Prophet Partners Inc.
To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 10:46 AM
Subject: Re: [ga] significant user representation
Hi Chuck,
You said "I believe that giving users more meaningful choices of TLDs has the potential of giving users, at least registrants, a voice through their buying choices."
That is only looking at half the picture, namely new registrants who have a CHOICE of TLDs before they establish a website. Existing registrants with established websites have their hands tied, regardless of how many new TLDs are introduced and can be severely impacted by poor policy making or irresponsible decisions. These proposed .biz/.info/.org registry agreements are a perfect example. The user community needs a way voice to its opinions during the decision making process and before these bad policies are formed.
A new registrant is like someone who is looking to plant a tree seed and has many locations from which to choose. On the other hand, an existing registrant is like someone who has already planted a tree seed. Once established, it is difficult to move and it becomes increasingly harder to move as the roots grow deeper.
Sincerely,
Ted
Prophet Partners Inc.
http://www.ProphetPartners.com
http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com
----- Original Message -----
From: Joop Teernstra
To: Gomes, Chuck
Cc: kidsearch ; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 9:12 AM
Subject: [ga] significant user representation
At 06:00 a.m. 3/09/2006, Gomes, Chuck wrote:
Chris,
As I tried to communicate on a previous post on this list, I have always supported a means of user representation but have never seen a solution that has really represented a significant sample of users. I also recognize though that the same is true of some of the GNSO constituencies, so it is a problem that still needs a solution. Simply creating a solution that gives a new group a voice that is captured by a few activists seems to simply repeat what already seeing. That is why I stated before that I believe that giving users more meaningful choices of TLDs has the potential of giving users, at least registrants, a voice through their buying choices. I am not opposed to other approaches as well, but I believe that they need to be representative of the broader community of users and not just a small group.
Chuck,
The main reason why only "activists" remained was the continued refusal by ICANN to recognize the right of At Large (or Individual Domain Name Owner) representation to become a meaningful part of the decisionmaking process.
The original 143.806 individuals (the original ICANN At Large "members") interested to vote for their own ICANN director, especially in North America and Europe were a large enough group of registrants to form a hard-to-capture and representative sample.
It takes a lot of stubborn staying power to keep on spending time and money in the face of
rejection and hostility, not to mention character assassination and active sabotage, and only the kind of people that are generally labeled as "activists" can bring this up.
The rest is eroded away.
For their commitment to the cause of the registering public alone, these "activists", would likely be elected as representatives, if domain name Registrants had the incentive and the procedures to do so.
Democratic policy making does not work by taking "significant samples". It is driven by small numbers of people who care and majorities who agree with them.
--Joop--
www.icannatlarge.com
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.12.1/440 - Release Date: 9/6/06
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|