** Reply to note from Patrick Vande Walle <patrick@vande-walle.eu> Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:38:41 +0100

On Thu, 8 Jan 2009 00:19:02 -0800 (PST), "Bill Silverstein" <icann-list@sorehands.com> wrote:

...

...

While I agree it would be best to suspend the process until the concerns are addressed, I think we should keep in mind that several potential new registries have already invested a lot of time, energy and money for a long time in this saga.

I was under the impression that application process for the new tlds have not been started. Maybe I am mistaken?

As you may know, this whole new gTLD process started many years ago.

There have

been tons of documents, meetings, etc to finally come up with this Applicant's guide. Many potential new entrants participated in the whole process over the last 3 years. This does have a cost. Suggesting that the process has not started because the final RFP is not officially published is dismissing one of the most important parts of the work, which is the preparation of the RFP.

I did mean the actual acceptance of applications. The parties who became involved early did so at their own risk, as there was no guaranty as to the final start of the application acceptance or the exact terms of the application process.

...

...

By asking to suspend the process, we risk killing innovation and we play the game of the incumbents.

What about the the internet users, the public? Or do we protect the interests of a few people who jumped the gun on spending money for a process that has not been finalized?

I think it is the best interest of the public to have alternatives to the incumbent registry operators.

I don't think it is, or at lease until until it is shown that ICANN has the will to enforce the rules that have been developed. And take quick decisive actions to prevent abuses and protect the public. This has not been shown. ------------------------------------------------------ Who is General Error and why is he reading my drive?