RE: [ga] Re: Capture by a Self-interested Faction

[Tim Ruiz <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Agreed. That's why I pushed to have the suggested allocation methods removed and suggested that it be a separate effort. It deserves&nbsp;more focused and detailed&nbsp;attention than what the RN WG can give it in the time frame were working within.<BR><BR>Tim <BR>
<div   name="wmMessageComp"><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Capture by a Self-interested Faction<BR>From: "Dominik Filipp" &lt;dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Mon, March 12, 2007 9:43 am<BR>To: "Tim Ruiz" &lt;tim@xxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc: &lt;ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;, "Stephane Bortzmeyer" &lt;bortzmeyer@xxxxxx&gt;,<BR>"Danny Younger" &lt;dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=321205913-12032007><FONT face=Arial size=2>Tim,</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=321205913-12032007><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=321205913-12032007><FONT face=Arial size=2>
as for the one-letter second-level domain release, the only fair-minded
attitude one can stand for is designing a release process allowing anybody to take part in the registration of&nbsp;these domains on equal chance basis. Any other solution prioritizing commercial interests and exluding the majority of registrants out of the process would just be&nbsp;yet another&nbsp;speculation. If this&nbsp;intention is not sufficiently supported by&nbsp;WG or&nbsp;such a process is not technically&nbsp;or effectively achievable for any reason then, indeed, these recommendations and proposals should be&nbsp;better thrown into the trash.</FONT></SPAN></DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=321205913-12032007><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></SPAN>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV dir=ltr align=left><SPAN class=321205913-12032007><FONT face=Arial size=2>Dominik</FONT></SPAN></DIV><BR>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader lang=en-us dir=ltr align=left>
<HR tabIndex=-1>
<FONT face=Tahoma size=2><B>From:</B> Tim Ruiz [mailto:tim@xxxxxxxxxxx] <BR><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, March 10, 2007 3:07 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Dominik Filipp<BR><B>Cc:</B> ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Stephane Bortzmeyer; Danny Younger<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: [ga] Re: Capture by a Self-interested Faction<BR></FONT><BR></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV>Dominik,</DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial color=#0000ff size=2></FONT>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
The first priority of the Reserved Names WG is to provide background and
recommendations to the new gTLDs&nbsp;regarding the introduction&nbsp;of new gTLDs, specifically reserved strings at the top level. The terms of work for the WG also includs reviewing reserved names at the second level since such reservation requirements will affect any new gTLD operators that are selected. </DIV>
<DIV>&nbsp;</DIV>
<DIV>
So it is not that ICANN has prioritized the release of single character
names at the second level above everything else,&nbsp;it is included in the work as applicable to the introduction of new gTLDs. But of course, there's no&nbsp;doubt&nbsp;that various parties within the WG are primarily&nbsp;involved for that reason. And there's no doubt that the lobbying done by some of those parties is partly why that category of reserved names is included in the WG's terms of work.</DIV>
<DIV><BR><BR>Tim <BR></DIV>
<DIV name="wmMessageComp"><BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 8px; MARGIN-LEFT: 8px; BORDER-LEFT: blue 2px solid">-------- Original Message --------<BR>Subject: RE: [ga] Re: Capture by a Self-interested Faction<BR>From: "Dominik Filipp" &lt;dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Date: Fri, March 09, 2007 2:51 am<BR>To: "Stephane Bortzmeyer" &lt;bortzmeyer@xxxxxx&gt;, "Danny Younger"<BR>&lt;dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR>Cc: &lt;ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx&gt;<BR><BR>
There is perhaps no reasons to reserve one-letter names in general
but<BR>
it's surprising that ICANN, instead of dealing with much more
important<BR>
and urgent agenda, is putting its effort into something that
again<BR>
smacks of sort of bargaining. We are talking about exactly 26
domain<BR>names gaining extreme value during the long time they are being<BR>
reserved, worthy of millions bucks each when auctioned. You can be
damn<BR>
sure most of the names once released will soon appear at auctions
and<BR>
all the profit will come to the pockets of those demanding their
release<BR>at ICANN today.<BR><BR>
So, not the names themselves but the order of importance is what
makes<BR>me sick.<BR><BR>Dominik<BR><BR><BR>-----Original Message-----<BR>
From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf<BR>Of Stephane Bortzmeyer<BR>Sent: Thursday, March 08, 2007 2:02 PM<BR>To: Danny Younger<BR>Cc: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>Subject: [ga] Re: Capture by a Self-interested Faction<BR><BR>On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 03:35:18PM -0800, &nbsp;Danny Younger<BR>
&lt;dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx&gt; wrote &nbsp;a message of 71 lines which
said:<BR>&gt;&gt; These recommendations should be thrown into the trash,<BR><BR>&gt; Why? There were absolutely no reasons to reserve these names.<BR>&gt; Therefore, there are no reasons to keep them frozen.<BR><BR>&gt; I am under the strong feeling that some people will refuse<BR>
&gt; anything coming from ICANN. Most of the time, ICANN is accused
of<BR>
&gt; regulating too much. And now that a report suggest to loosen the
grip,<BR>&gt; always-complainers regret the old restriction? </BLOCKQUOTE></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV>