Re: [ga] ICANN Board postponing further sTLDs
Who benefits economically from not launching additional TLDs. Follow
the money . .
Tuesday, October 28, 2003, 7:58:03 AM, Richard Henderson
<richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
RH> HelpThe ICANN Board, in a move which reverses Stuart Lynn's proposal for at
least 3 more sponsored TLDs, announced its view that any further TLDs should be
postponed indefinitely, on the grounds
RH> that they should focus on Evaluation, and on the grounds that they were
understaffed.
RH> This is astonishing. Read their Oct 20 comments here:
RH> http://www.icann.org/minutes/prelim-report-13oct03 .htm [icann.org]
RH> "Mr. Twomey reviewed for the Board... considerations raised by the
community and Board members on the creation of new sTLDs and new TLDs
generally. ...and what timeline for the consideration of
RH> new sTLDs, and eventually new generic TLDs was feasible and responsible in
light of work to be done."
RH> "A suggestion was that gTLD specific issues be set aside until these issues
could be reviewed and examined in detail, expert analysis could be undertaken
and community input received. Further, it
RH> was noted that the nature of TLD relationships with ICANN was a structure
under much debate at present, and deserved a better understanding of the goals
of the parties prior to expanding the
RH> number of these relationships."
RH> "Board members remarked on the significant staffing constraints for ICANN
at present, and the foreseen lack of an ability for ICANN to both oversee a
round of new sTLD applications, and also
RH> invest significant resources and time in gathering and analyzing data on
gTLD issues."
RH> "The board debated the wisdom in moving ahead with the creation of new TLDs
at this time, in light of the need to shortly commence a full scale review of
policy in this area. A brief debate
RH> ensued among Board members as to the appropriate set of issues that should
be included in a review and development of policy relating to the creation of
new TLDs."
RH> "Board members voiced concerns that many of the TLDs created during the
2000 round were still struggling with myriad acceptance and distribution
issues, and that these issues should be carefully
RH> examined and addressed to the extent possible prior to considering the
creation of new TLDs on a large-scale basis."
RH> "Discussion ensued among the Board members; in particular, board members
focused on the short time frame set forth in the new MoU for the development of
strategy and policy in this area, and
RH> concerns that any action on sTLDs at present would detract from that
effort"
RH> "In summarizing the views expressed on the topic, Mr. Cerf noted the
discussion among the Board did not seem supportive of moving forward with a
limited round of new sTLDs at this time."
RH> So it seems that the world must wait, and not a single further TLD will
proceed, because ICANN is not up to the job of evaluating and launching further
TLDs.
RH> Everything has to be delayed because ICANN has not (after all this time)
carried out its Evaluation Process, and does not have staff to do the work.
RH> We are talking about a worldwide resource generating billions of pounds and
vital for a huge range of social, health and educational resources.
RH> Why is the development of this resource being delayed by a handful of
people working from a few offices in a manner which is demonstrably amateur?
RH> Why is the development of this resource being delayed by ICANN's admitted
shortcomings?
RH> Or are these delays further evidence of a deliberate strategy?
RH> Richard Henderson
----
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
donbrown_l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.inetconcepts.net
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
----