[ncdnhc-discuss] About Marketing Practices in .ORG

[Kent Crispin]

On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:54:31PM +0000, Chris Bailey wrote:
> 
> Milton,
> 
> The policy of Sponsored, Unrestricted was voted for 27-1 by this 
> Constituency after a great deal of debate and then endorsed unanimously by 
> the .org taskforce.

This constituency and the TF have a fundamental lack of understanding of
what the terms mean.  

> If it is now untenable to go forward with it because 
> one person has decided to overrule it

Louis pointed out that the meaning of the terms "sponsored" and
"unrestricted", as formally incorporated in the various legal documents,
was incompatible with the way the terms were used in the TF's report.

It is also true that the constituency and the TF are missing a
fundamental and quite obvious principle that ICANN is adhering to fairly
strongly, a principle that I think that most people in the constituency
would actually agree with, if they thought about it for a few moments,
since it is something they have argued for very strongly: the governance
of a TLD should not systematically exclude certain classes of
registrants in the TLD.  That is, however, precisely what the NCC and
the TF have been advocating.

An obvious corollary is that there is no need for a sponsor, if the TLD 
is unrestricted.

> (before it even came within his remit 
> actually), then there really seems to be only one honest course of action 
> for this Constituency to take.
> 
> I propose we wind up the NCDNHC forthwith. It seems that all we are really 
> doing is acting as a farcical cover of democracy for what is actually a 
> dictatorship.

Sounds like a plan.  Go for it.

-- 
Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
kent at songbird.com                           lonesome." -- Mark Twain