Re: [ga] gTLD Constituency
At 05:21 PM 4/9/2001 -0700, Kent Crispin wrote:
>On Mon, Apr 09, 2001 at 06:47:44PM -0400, Jonathan Weinberg wrote:
> > incumbent); and  anyway, it could be worse -- after all, if the gTLD
> > constituency had more votes, the resulting structure would be even *more*
> > anticompetitive.
>Jeez. What an absolutely silly and ridiculous distortion. The gTLD
>constituency is __14%__ of the NC, for petes sake. By any measure that
>is a small minority, and it is just silly to claim that the behavior of
>such a small minority is going to make the "resulting structure"
>I have my complaints about NSI as well, but it really looks to me like
>people have let their emotions completely destroy their reason.
I'm surprised at your vituperative response, Kent. Back when the
DNSO constituencies were formed, as you remember, ICANN paid great
attention to the makeup and structure of each constituency. The Board
directed that it would recognize the various constituencies only
provisionally, while staff worked with the organizers of each to ensure
that their makeup and structure were open, fair, inclusive and
procompetitive. Nobody suggested then that ICANN should ignore such issues
with respect to a given constituency on the ground that that constituency's
representatives were only "14% of the NC, for petes sake." Had anyone made
such a suggestion at the time, it would have been viewed as, well,
silly. At the time, ICANN took the position that the gTLD constituency had
only one member -- NSI. Now that that constituency is being expanded, it's
apppropriate to subject its makeup and structure to the same scrutiny that
every other constituency got.
(I'm also confused by your reference to NSI; it doesn't strike me
that this is about NSI. NSI's position within the "new" gTLD constituency
will be determined by constituency rules yet to be determined (will all
registries have an equal vote within the constituency? will they have votes
weighted by their size? if the latter, will there be a cap? etc.). If I
had to make a prediction, I'd guess that, entirely aside from the question
whether the gTLD constituency should include prospective registries, those
rules will end up ensuring that NSI will have the practical ability to
name exactly one NC representative of its own -- same as now.)
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html