ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[ga]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Performance of ICANN Staff as Measured by ICANN's Core Values

  • To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Subject: Re: [ga] Performance of ICANN Staff as Measured by ICANN's Core Values
  • From: George Kirikos <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 06:52:33 -0700 (PDT)
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:Received:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=kVhmO0pTjaIkv6+DqXBpltx9HRdcxxprQWxZ+RP1lQFIo/2YIHgpOkX4wbUvYavg27Sc11gh7L7+rPO1h7/+sggSPUegXv0TWdlMg/hplTC8r6bBEOV8V/S6zrC+63bu4YPM6IVJbFsa9tMCujHdCBk7SQudULBaPpHJbubm9Uo= ;
  • In-reply-to: <02ff01c6d7e7$fb6b5390$f94b5645@defaultzkwqxj>
  • Sender: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hello,

--- "Prophet Partners Inc." <Domains@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> As evidenced by the near unanimous public opposition to the proposed
> .biz/.info/.org registry agreements, the ICANN staff member(s) who
> negotiated these contracts clearly failed to adhere to ICANN's Core
> Values
> and act in the best interests of the public. Let's be objective and
> rate the
> performance of ICANN staff member(s) based on the 11 criteria below.

Great analysis!

ICANN's handling of the .biz/info/org contracts was completely
backwards. To do things properly, the draft contracts should have been
produced via "bottom up" processes of the GNSO. A consensus draft
contract template would be produced, and then prospective registry
operators would compete in a public tender to fulfill that contract for
a set term. This is done all the time in both the public (e.g. road
construction, airport concessions, military supplies) and private
sectors (computer outsourcing, eLance.com, supplying toner cartridges)
--- a set of specifications is written, and then bidders compete for
the outsourcing of those goods or services for the preset contract.

Instead, we had the incumbent registry operators try to route around
this, and entrench themselves permanently through presumptive renewal,
and try to increase prices through the removal of price caps, among
other questionable terms. If anyone had negotiated deals like that in
any other organization, they'd be given a pink slip (well, not the
registry operators' negotiators --- they'd be given raises, for
suckering in ICANN!). ICANN's staffers should not be immune from those
realities.

The fact that ICANN staffers seem to want "presumptive renewal" for
their own jobs, making them immune from repercussions when they perform
poorly, illustrates perfectly why we don't want presumptive renewal for
registries. 

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>