Re: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from BoD, Staff,NC,TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections

[Eric Dierker <ERIC@HI-TEK.COM>]

Thank you, based upon information gathered over the months from your site, this
does not surprise me.  I hope that inclusion of this data suggests that there
may be a place for a toll -free constitiuency. Upon going back to ICANN's
orginazational information with this in mind perhaps this proposal should be
broached sooner than later to asure a bottoms up approach.

Sincerely,

Judith Oppenheimer wrote:

> More info from NSI's vast store of knowledge, "a significant portion (76%)
> of toll-free numbers as domain names are from very small businesses."
>
> Also,  "42% of domain names with toll-free numbers in their name are active
> and have live Web sites."
>
> At least among this group of small business domain holders, usage is
> significantly higher than 10%.
>
> Judith
>
> http://www.ICBTollFreeNews.com
> "An important source of inside information," says InfoWorld;
> "superb", "invaluable", "critically intelligent", "exceedingly
> useful", report ICB Premium Subscribers.
> ICB Premium Service is On Sale thru January 15.
> http://www.icbtollfree.com/Article4910.htm
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Eric Dierker [mailto:ERIC@HI-TEK.COM]
> > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 6:42 PM
> > To: Judith Oppenheimer
> > Cc: wg-review@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from BoD, Staff,
> > NC,TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections
> >
> >
> > I apologize for the mistake, although on further review it
> > may be a combination
> > of the 75.5% and the 14.2% or 89.9%.  I wonder about this
> > though, as most 1-4
> > employee businesses are sole proprietors, and the name would
> > be held by
> > individuals anyhow. I speculate that only about 10% of the
> > names are actually
> > in use. This is not for argument but just for clarity of
> > thought, and my
> > thought is only rough.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Judith Oppenheimer wrote:
> >
> > > For clarity's sake, particularly if you are going to use my
> > name, the
> > > relevant statistic is that 75.5% of domain registrants are
> > SMALL businesses
> > > of BETWEEN ONE AND FOUR EMPLOYEES.
> > >
> > > Judith
> > >
> > > http://www.ICBTollFreeNews.com
> > > "An important source of inside information," says InfoWorld;
> > > "superb", "invaluable", "critically intelligent", "exceedingly
> > > useful", report ICB Premium Subscribers.
> > > ICB Premium Service is On Sale thru January 15.
> > > http://www.icbtollfree.com/Article4910.htm
> > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: owner-wg-review@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-review@dnso.org]On
> > > > Behalf Of Eric Dierker
> > > > Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 4:29 PM
> > > > To: Kent Crispin
> > > > Cc: wg-review@dnso.org
> > > > Subject: Re: [wg-review] Clarifications requested from
> > BoD, Staff, NC,
> > > > TC,Chair prior to co-Chair elections
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for your response.  The debate yesterday regarding
> > > > adhesion contracts
> > > > and registrars and TMs would be a point of argument regarding
> > > > being very careful
> > > > not to violate.  Microsofts failed defense of the justice
> > > > departments attack upon
> > > > it would be another point of argument here.  And I think we
> > > > could agree that ICANN
> > > > is not in competition with anyone, although the alternative
> > > > root servers may argue
> > > > this point.
> > > >
> > > > So it would appear that while coming from different angles we
> > > > agree that a larger
> > > > constituent base would be a very good idea for ICANN,
> > > > assuming that we are trying
> > > > to fix the structure as opposed to replacing it.
> > > >
> > > > Looking again at the organizational chart I think several
> > > > more constituencies
> > > > would not hurt at all.  Once again this could be done simply
> > > > by creating interest
> > > > blocks in the GA and increasing the percentage of directors
> > > > flowing therefrom.
> > > >
> > > > This has to be done in conjunction with Ms. Merry's
> > > > suggestions which will
> > > > increase the participation level, of Ms. Oppenheimers 85%, a
> > > > clear majority above
> > > > the 67% as set forth in the metamorphising definition of
> > consensus.
> > > >
> > > > So moving in this direction we are formulating Charter
> > > > corrections even while
> > > > working within the existing charter. Please heed the
> > > > intelligence of the recent
> > > > suggestion not to get bogged down in semantics, I do not
> > > > stand by any rigid
> > > > definition at this point.
> > > >
> > > > Sincerely,
> > > >
> > > > Kent Crispin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Thu, Jan 11, 2001 at 10:09:15AM -0800, Eric Dierker wrote:
> > > > > > Mr. Crispin,
> > > > > > This is a very nice insight into the truth of the
> > monopoly matter.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > >
> > > > > >  But it is
> > > > > > also true that it will only continue to exist if it does
> > > > not cause a problem
> > > > > > that anti-trust laws are designed to prohibit.
> > > > >
> > > > > Quite true.
> > > > >
> > > > > > ICANN is doing that right now
> > > > >
> > > > > No, it's not.  If there is anything that ICANN has been
> > very careful
> > > > > about, it is avoiding antitrust.  It has been, as I
> > said, a primary
> > > > > concern from the very beginning.
> > > > >
> > > > > > and if it does not get fixed from the inside I am certain
> > > > it will get fixed
> > > > > > from the outside. So we had better get busy and get the
> > > > people or entities
> > > > > > affected by ICANN into the decision making process.
> > > > >
> > > > > In general, getting affected entities involved in the
> > > > decision making
> > > > > process is not at all necessary to avoid anti-trust.  For
> > > > example, we
> > > > > don't deal with Microsoft by holding at large elections for
> > > > the board of
> > > > > directors of Microsoft.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Kent Crispin                               "Be good,
> > and you will be
> > > > > kent@songbird.com                           lonesome."
> > -- Mark Twain
> > > > > --
> > > > > This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> > > > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > > > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> > > > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> > > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
begin:vcard 
n:Dierker;Eric
tel;fax:(858) 571-8497
tel;work:(858) 571-8431
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
adr:;;;;;;
version:2.1
email;internet:Eric@Hi-Tek.com
end:vcard