RE: [ga] significant user representation

["Gomes, Chuck" <cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ted,
 
Your interpretation is not at all what I intended to say.  I fully
support everyone's ability to submit comments.  I do believe though that
all comments, whether from individuals or constituencies should be
evaluated relative to how representative they are of the broader
community.
 

Chuck Gomes
VeriSign Information Services



 


________________________________

	From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Prophet Partners Inc.
	Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 5:36 PM
	To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
	Subject: Re: [ga] significant user representation
	
	
	Hi Chris,
	 
	My interpretation of Chuck's comment to you last week is that he
implies public comment should come from a publicly appointed
spokesperson(s) to be valid, otherwise the opinion only represents a few
so-called activists. His solution of empowering the public via more TLD
choices is only a solution for a subset of the public community and not
all registrants. Consumer choice is a perfectly acceptable solution in a
truly free and competitive market environment, but in a single supplier
market, it simply doesn't work.
	 
	
	Sincerely,
	Ted
	Prophet Partners Inc.
	http://www.ProphetPartners.com <http://www.ProphetPartners.com> 
	http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com
<http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com> 
	 
	

		----- Original Message ----- 
		From: kidsearch <mailto:kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
		To: Prophet Partners Inc.
<mailto:Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  ; ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
		Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2006 12:43 PM
		Subject: 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.
<mailto:Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
			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.ProphetPartners.com> 
			http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com
<http://www.Premium-Domain-Names.com> 
			 

				----- Original Message ----- 
				From: Joop Teernstra
<mailto:terastra@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
				To: Gomes, Chuck
<mailto:cgomes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>  
				Cc: kidsearch
<mailto:kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  ; 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 <http://www.icannatlarge.com/>
.icannatlarge.com <http://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