[wg-c] Resend: Some nagging questions not on the WG-C agenda

[Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>]

One private response has been received from Ian Penman, a correction was
suggested by Craig Simon (made), who also bothered to ask a comparative
religion question (odd, but interesting), and Roeland Meyer responded to
the list. The corrected original follows, though it is no long Sunday
before Advent.

Cheers,
Eric
--------

John Calvin wrote 159 sermons on the subject of the Book of Job. It is quite
possible that WG-C could take longer on some vastly simpler subjects. In the
questions which follow, a "case for X has been made" if the reader is firmly
of the belief that X has been proved. Martin Luther wrote 95 theses, but only
14 questions to the fractious are posed here.

Possible answers are "yes", "no", "undecided", "poorly phrased question", and
"irrelevant topic". Lengthy answers are likely to be difficult to tally, if a
tally results. Readers who would like to participate in a tally may drop me a
line (please use the word "tally" in the subject line), or reply to the WG-C
mailing list. 

A non-exhaustive list of advocates of the position is also listed, as a
matter of courtesy to the advocate(s). Errors of phrasing are mine alone.



A. Has the case that partition of the global DNS root into multiple roots
   with inconsistent name-to-address mappings is desirable, or at least
   not harmful been made?

   [Advocates: Tony Rutkowski, possibly others]
 
B. Has the case that ICANN lacks the capacity to make policy on the subject
   of registry operator business models been made?

   [Advocates: Tony Rutkowski, Mikki Berry, possibly others]

C. Has the case that non-profits must not precede for-profits been made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, Roeland Meyer, possibly others]

D. Has the case that for-profits are indistinguishable from non-profits been
   made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, William Walsh, Christopher Ambler, possibly
    others]

E. Has the case that ICANN lacks the capacity to make policy on the subject
   of registry architecture been made?

   [Advocates: Tony Rutkowski, Mikki Berry, possibly others]

F. Has the case that shared registry systems must not precede unified registry
   systems been made?

   [Advocates: Roeland Meyer, possibly others]

G. Has the case that market policy must precede other policies been made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, Roeland Meyer, possibly others]

H. Has the case that for-profits created by non-profits must not precede
   independently created for-profits been made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, Roeland Meyer, possibly others]

I. Has the case that lock-in can not exist been made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, William Walsh, possibly others]

J. Has the case that conversion from a non-profit to a for-profit is not an
   acceptable mechanism to create for-profit registry operators been made?

   [Advocates:  Christopher Ambler, possibly others]

K. Has the case that non-consensus requires adoption of a specific proposal
   been made?

   [Advocates: Milton Meuller, Christopher Ambler, Mark Langston, William
    Walsh, Kathryn Vestal, possibly others]

L. Has the case that the set of least concern common to Position Papers A,
   C, D, and E is of no utility been made?

   [Advocates: Identical with Question K, above]

M. Has the case that registry data is property been made?

   [Advocates:  Christopher Ambler, Roeland Meyer, possibly others]

N. Has the case that the privatization course of the US Colored Papers is
   more beneficial and simpler to implement than the public trust course
   of the IAHC gTLD-MoU been made?

   [Advocates: Ira Magaziner (not a WG-C member), possibly others]


Remember, a "yes" means that the position is accepted, a "no" that it is
rejected by the reader. The other suggested answers are straightforward.

Sunday before Advent (or after Thanksgiving in the States)
Cheers,
Eric