[council] FW: Proposal to form a Joint ALAC - GNSO WG "to develop a sustainable approach to providing support to applicants requiring assistance in applying for and operating new gTLDs" in response to the ICANN Board Resolution 20 at the Nairobi

Rafik Dammak rafik.dammak at GMAIL.COM
Sun Mar 21 07:58:30 CET 2010


Thank you Avri,
I think that the comments are getting worse in the GNSO ML and we have
clearly the opposition from councilors (mostly from contracted party) from
rich countries.

Rafik

2010/3/21 Avri Doria <avri at ltu.se>

> On 20 Mar 2010, at 13:30, Jorge Amodio wrote:
>
> > If you are already defining what the outcome/goal of the working group
> > has to be, there is no reason for a working group.
>
>
> on the contrary.  we have a hypothesis.
>
> perhaps WG is the wrong name, since Wg now come with baggage.
> i am more the willing neologize a new name for a the small band that tries
> to disprove the hypothesis that:
>
> - a well formed, but small, TLD registry operation that meets ICANN
> requirements can be run for far less in development regions then it would
> cost to run the same size registry in the developed world.
>
> if this can't be disproved and someone can show a reasonable cost breakdown
> for a well formed Registry in a development region, then perhaps we can
> dispel the perpetual comments that come like:
>
>
> from http://gnso.icann.org/mailing-lists/archives/council/msg08596.html
>
> snip
>
> > My first question to any of them though
> > would be to ask if the entry cost is too high, do you actually have the
> > resources then to run a TLD?
>
> and this goes some way to dispelling one of the perpetual remarks one hears
> whenever one tries to talk about lowering the prices (and just because the
> staff says fees won't be lowered does  not make that necessarily true)  or
> establishing a fund to help those who want to try and create a TLD despite
> most of the rich people's world of ICANN being united against them.
>
> a.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ncuc.org/pipermail/ncuc-discuss/attachments/20100321/df6aac9a/attachment.html>


More information about the Ncuc-discuss mailing list