On 19 May 2016 at 19:33, Thomas Lowenhaupt <toml@communisphere.com> wrote:

But I’ve broader concerns that center on a governance process that has excluded New York City’s individual Internet users (IIUs) from meaningful participation in scoping and imagining our city’s TLD in every phase of its development and ongoing operation.

First you have to argue the point that New York City citizens have more of an entitlement to oversee the operation of its TLD than they do over other day-to-day municipal issues such as trash, police or transit. You have not established that case yet.

with 1/2 our city's 8 million population foreign born, some might have submitted comments about domain names such as mx.nyc: perhaps suggesting that it be used to address the needs of New York City's 300,000 Mexican immigrants.

Evidence, please. I invite you to find ONE Mexican immigrant to NYC who gives a damn about this.

The relevance of "MX" to Mexico in TLD space *only* relates to the ISO codes for countries used in their ccTLD designations. It has no special relevance in gTLD space. Why should Mexicans care more about the governance of mx.nyc than mexico.nyc, mex.nyc or (since we're talking about individuals) mexicanos.nyc?

Or, better still, rather than just take a wild guess that anyone would care, you actually could have ASKED THEM. But then, it's easier to demand other volunteers to to all the hard slogging than to actually add any evidence to the debate.

There is no basis to the assertion that there is any special reason to care about the governance of two letter second-level domains (as opposed to any other 2LDs). This issue is a remnant of the GAC's wish at one point to reserve all two-letter domains for the use of national governments.

Or perhaps some of the 800,000 residents with ties to the Dominican Republic would have had suggestions about do.nyc's potential to serve that community. But they (nor the Chinese, Nigerians, Bolivians, etc.) were never provided with that opportunity. One is left to wonder what might have emerged from the minds of those 4,000,000 foreign born and the other New Yorkers.

So let me get this straight ... your call for the ALAC and NARALO and ICANN staff to engage in a whole slew of resource-sapping activity is based on your sense of wonder?

My comments for the 4 2-character domains activated here (ac, in, na, vg) are similar to those authorized by the 26 May 2015 change above. But seeing the “in” domain name, and with my residence located in “Little India,” and long holding hope of one day traveling to that wonderful country, I dreamt about traveling there and finding a nyc.mumbai, nyc.chennai, or nyc.bangalore, and how they might ease navigation and add comfort to my visit.

How colonial. You might be more likely to find न्यूयॉर्क.चेन्नई, no?

Or, better still, a

llow me to introduce you to Google

Yelp

and TripAdvisor

. They may

offer the

help

you seek

. And

, unlike the product of dreams and wonders, they exist today.

In any case, when I think of intuitive uses for the domain "in.nyc", India is not a factor at all.

With this change (which added 14 new RDDS fields to each domain name’s contact data) I'm curious about the impact it will have on the city's nexus policy.

Curiosity, like wish and wonder, does not form a sound basis for policy development, especially that which commits other volunteers to act. I have yet to see any logic or evidence here, just emotions.

Ah, enough of this. Life's too short for me to be wasting my time any further in deconstructing this list of hopes, dreams and entitlements masquerading as advocacy. It's an utterly baseless foundation for action. Suffice it to say I would argue vigorously against NARALO indulging activity based on what is presently on offer.

- Evan