+1 Carlton ============================== Carlton A Samuels Mobile: 876-818-1799 Strategy, Planning, Governance, Assessment & Turnaround ============================= On Fri, Jul 30, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Antony Van Couvering <avc@namesatwork.com>wrote:
I fail to see why names that are sold to a willing public should be subject to schemes of segregation, classification, and categorization, with all the regulations and restrictions that come with them. As Elisabeth has pointed out, referencing the history of .fr, many categorization schemes have been tried, and have been found wanting by the public.
The disdain I see dripped onto open ccTLDs that are marketing themselves to the world for their own profit and (in almost every case) to the benefit of the Internet community in those countries and territories, not to mention the users who happily register those names, would be more usefully channeled into outrage at the neglect, desuetude, and mismanagement of ccTLDs where users cannot obtain a name except at great expense, time, and red tape -- if they are allowed to get them at all.
Let's not forget that the ccTLD world is more than a few TLDs that market themselves to the world. The 250-odd ccTLDs consist of the following types:
- Open TLDs (no residency requirement) that don't do much marketing, period - Open TLDs that market within their country, but not internationally - Closed TLDs (restricted to residents of the country or territory) that are run efficiently and fairly, such as several European TLDs - Closed TLDs that are run arbitrarily and capriciously, such as .zw. - TLDs that restrict registrations only to businesses, depriving natural persons of the right to an online identity, such as .hk - TLDs that are so closed that they can hardly be said to be running at all, as is the case with far too many African TLDs - TLDs that are not even in the root due to political squabbles, such as .eh - TLDs that are in the root but are kept closed by their colonial owners, such as .bv
These last five types are the problem TLDs, not those that venture out into the world and make their services available to everyone. The last five types are those that exclude, gouge, paralyze, spurn, humiliate and frustrate Internet users. If anyone is looking for ccTLDs that need some scrutiny, there they are -- hiding in plain sight.
Sometimes I feel as if ICANN is filled with old scolds who frown and cluck when the children dare to speak without permission, as if it were their right and duty to correct and chastise -- and if the rest of us were children. Even after all the hierarchies and categories and segregations that have been tried and been found wanting (see the history of .fr, .es, .se, etc.), and even after all the experience of closed and restricted ccTLDs that have earned the hatred of their local Internet communities, the impulse to restrict, control, and supervise seems never to disappear -- especially when someone else is doing well.
The confusion caused by .CO seems to be entirely within ICANN. I haven't heard a single report of a user having any trouble at all.
Antony
_______________________________________________ At-Large mailing list At-Large@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large_atlarge-lists.icann...
At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org