[ncdnhc-discuss] One suggestion for .ORG TF participant!

[James Love]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alejandro Pisanty - DGSCA y FQ, UNAM" <apisan at servidor.unam.mx>
To: "James Love" <james.love at cptech.org>
Cc: "Chun Eung Hwi" <ehchun at peacenet.or.kr>; <discuss at icann-ncc.org>;
<adcom02 at icann-ncc.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 11:52 PM
Subject: Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] One suggestion for .ORG TF participant!


> James,
>
> does your proposal for a two-stage bidding for .org mean that the Board
> selects the non-profit, based on community input and consensus-based
> rules, and then the non-profit selects the operator without such input and
> rules?
>
> Alejandro Pisanty
>

    I am flexiable on the second stage.  If the operator is just providing
the bits and bytes, then the non-profit could pick the operator accounting
to a proceedure set out in the first stage.  For example, suppose I said,
give it to me, and I'll:

1.      choose the lowest priced qualified operator, or
2.      Choose an operator that puts the most money into a good works fund,
or
3.      work with the competitive registrars to select an operator,
4.    Pick only a union operator,

etc......   at least the system for picking the operator would be
transparent.

I am assuming the Internet Society or some non-proft that appeals to the
membership of the BOD will will the first stage.  One board member told me
that the board was thinking of keeping .org for ICANN itself, to fund ICANN.
I don't know for sure where this is going.  I think people should think
about a system that works even when they are not sure who wins the 1st
stage.     Getting rid of the operator financed and controlled non-profits
would be a good thing for the first round, IMO.

  Jamie

--------------------------------
James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org
http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040