Re: [wg-c] straw vote -- question one results & call for votes on remaining questions

["Siegfried Langenbach" <svl@nrw.net>]

I must agree with Werner,
in my understanding the options for the first Q was not black or white
but few vs. many

I would suppose that the logical alternative for those who wanted many
is lets start with few if many is not possible [today]
and not either many or nothing

siegfried

On 19 Aug 99, at 19:49, Werner Staub wrote:

> Mark,
> 
> > >The problem is not in the result of the vote, it is in the way you asked
> > >the question. Amongst the 22 people who did not vote for option 1, there
> > >are many who can live with it as second-best. The reason is that starting
> > >with few gTLDs does not exclude adding more gTLDs later.
> > 
> > However, what question 1 clearly requires is yet another round of these
> > exact same arguments every single time anyone wants to expand the
> > namespace some more.  How many times is it necessary we cover the
> > same ground? (...)
> 
> Let us cover that ground it when we have to. We do not have to 
> cover it now. We can identify the existing common ground, and that
> clearly is to start with a few new gLTDs as opposed to doing nothing.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Werner
> 
> 
> -- 
> Tel: +41 22 312 5600  Direct line: +41 22 312 5640  http://axone.ch
> Fax: +41 22 312 5601  2 cours de Rive   CH-1204 Geneva, Switzerland
>