Re: [wg-c] Eureka?

[Kent Crispin <kent@songbird.com>]

On Fri, Aug 06, 1999 at 03:59:42PM -0400, Milton Mueller wrote:
[...]
> >
> > No, it doesn't.  It would help, though, if you would trim your email
> > messages to word wrap at something less than 80 columns.
> 
> Strange. It showed up in my computer wrapped at 65.

I was referring to outgoing messages, not messages you received.  I 
frequently go through and laboriously reformat people's messages for 
them, so that the replies can be meaningfully interleaved.

> > In particular, of course, I don't believe ICANN should enable
> > exclusive registries.  Nor do I think that registries should pick
> > their TLDs -- I think that there should be many registries, but that
> > they should  bid to run TLDs with fixed term renewable contracts.
> 
> I know that we don't agree about business models.

Just curious -- what, then, was the point of asking my opinion about 
something you knew in advance I wouldn't agree with?  

> I was thinking more of
> the issue of whether you thought that kind of an implementation
> timetable would be intrinsically threatening to trademark protection. I
> am particularly interested in the issue of whether any reasonable
> objection can be made to initially declaring that ICANN will add N
> number of gTLDs over three years ad proceeding with that plan unless
> some clearly defined criteria of failure are met.

Too fuzzy.

Here's a clearly defined criteria: "Unless a formal objection from
any Constituency of the DNSO is presented to the NC." Would that be
satisfactory?

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Do good, and you'll be
kent@songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain