[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Fwd: [wg-c] straw poll -- reminder]








Hello,

I would chose Option 1, as this seems to be an operationally safer way to
start.
The goal must be to speed up the process in the long run though.......


QUESTION ONE: HOW MANY NEW gTLDS, AND HOW FAST?

Option 1:  Without regard to whether it would be desirable to have many
gTLDs in the long term, ICANN should proceed now by adding only a few, and
then pausing for evaluation.  Only after assessing the results should it
initiate any action to add more.

Regards
--------------------------------------------------
Ann-Catherine Andersson  Telia Network Services
 +46-8 4568927  (PHONE)  Box 10707
 +46-8 4568935  (FAX)    121 29 Johanneshov
 aca@telia.net    SE

----------------------------------------------------


Jonathan Weinberg skrev:

>         I'm away from home, and as a result not as well-organized as I'd
> like to be.  Near as I can tell, the following 24 WG members who have
> posted to the list at least once[*] haven't submitted votes in the straw
> poll:  Dennis Jennings, Kilnam Chon, Daiva Tamulioniene, Eva Frolich,
> Amadeu Abril i Abril, Ivan Pope, Werner Staub, Ross Wm. Rader, Javier
> Sola, John Lewis, Tolga Yurderi, Petter Rindforth, Martin B. Schwimmer,
> Craig Simon, Jeffrey Neuman, Onno Hovers, Keith Gymer, Jim Glanz, Rob
> Hall, Raul Echeberria, Caroline Chicoine, Robert F. Connelly, Anthony
> Lupo, Kathryn Kleiman.
>
>         To the extent that any of you *have* voted (but I lost those files
> en route to my mother-in-law's house), please let me know.  For those of
> you who haven't voted, I urge you please to do so now.  You need only send
> in an answer to Question One at this point.  For your convenience, I'm
> reprinting Question One below.
>
> QUESTION ONE: HOW MANY NEW gTLDS, AND HOW FAST?
>
> Option 1:  Without regard to whether it would be desirable to have many
> gTLDs in the long term, ICANN should proceed now by adding only a few, and
> then pausing for evaluation.  Only after assessing the results should it
> initiate any action to add more.
>
> Option 2:  ICANN should implement a plan contemplating the authorization
> of many new gTLDs over the next few years.  (Example: ICANN might plan to
> authorize up to 10-12 new registries, each operating 1-3 new gTLDs, each
> year, for a period of five years; each year's authorizations would be
> staggered over the course of the year.)  This option would place the
> burden on opponents, if evidence comes in demonstrating that additional
> new gTLDs are a bad idea or that the rollout is too fast, to bring that
> evidence to ICANN's attention and call for a halt or a slowdown.
>
> -------------------------------
>
> [*] I figure that anybody who hasn't posted to the list even once has
> probably decided that his or her energies are best expended elsewhere.
>
> Jon
>
> Jonathan Weinberg
> co-chair, WG-C
> weinberg@msen.com