Re: [ga] Nomination Process

[Joop Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 15:20 10/06/01 +1200, DPF wrote:

>Some issues which come to mind are:
>
>a) Should it be gTLD name holders only

I see no reason at all to discriminate between gSLD and ccSLD (or third 
level) Domain registrants.

>b) How about ccTLD name holders

Full members.  The ccTLD registries leaving the DNSO and trying to become a 
new SO does not lessen the DNSO interests of their registrants in any way.
I have given Joanna's objection a lot of thought, but I cannot see any 
logic in creating a differentiation. Their interests remain the same.


>c) What if you hold a third or fourth level name - should that be
>eligible?

Yes, if it is the first level where Individual registration is permitted.

>d) If ones goes with (c) then should any individual at all be eligible
>as it is easy to get a third level name for free


See above.

>(e) Should there be a minimum age of membership

For holding office, yes.

>(f) Do you need to hold/own the name or just be the admin contact for
>it?

Admin contact is not enough. There should be "colour of title" and the 
determinant is the power to withdraw the Domain or let it lapse.


>(g) Should there be restrictions on membership of an individual
>constituency and other constituencies?

Some feel yes, others no. ICANN bylaws demand openness and free 
cross-memberships. In practice this has turned into a big organizational 
obstacle.
It is reasonable to impose restrictions when it comes to running for public 
office in any constituency.

All these questions have been threshed (bottom -up) out a long time ago.



--Joop--
Founder of the Cyberspace Association.
Former bootstrap of the IDNO (www.idno.org)
Developer of    The Polling Booth
www.democracy.org.nz


--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html