[ncdnhc-discuss] process for .org support

[James Love]

Milton's suggestion is a good one.   I was surprised to see 11 bids.  One 
would normally expect the NCC's views to be important, because it is the 
DNSO entity that is supposed to represent non-commerical domain name 
holders.   Perhaps the Adcom could create an NCC review committee to look at 
the bids, and persons in the NCC who are not associated with one of the 
bidders could indicate an interest in participating  on this committee.

Jamie

Milton Mueller wrote:
> Why don't we create a procedure? 
> 
> You can bet that all of the bidders will be combing
> the Bucharest meeting for support. Except perhaps
> for Malamud/Vixie. Hard to imagine that pair politicking!
> (Which may mean that they're the best of the lot. Or, 
> not.)
> 
> There do seem to be at least 4 worthwhile bids.
> If the constituency as a whole doesn't get its act
> together to do so collectively, I wll certainly mount a
> systematic evaluation and commentary on my own.
> --MM
> 
> 
>>>>"James Love" <james.love at cptech.org> 06/14/02 01:30PM >>>
>>>
> Can someone clarify how the support for .org applications is supposed to
> take place/  Are groups expected to declare which ones they support before
> they (a) see how it will be run, and (b) what competitors off to do?
> Jamie
> --------------------------------
> James Love mailto:james.love at cptech.org 
> http://www.cptech.org +1.202.387.8030 mobile +1.202.361.3040
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org 
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss at icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
> 
> 



-- 
------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love at cptech.org
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040