Hello Evan, Thanks for the input, but allow me to note that your observations, while logical, unfortunately are not correct. If you are making the claim that registrants are adequately represented by the BC and the NCUC in the GNSO, then unfortunately this claim is not borne out by the facts. You will recall that ICANN CEO Paul Twomey put forward a well-publicized call for input regarding registrant protections in the wake of the RegisterFly debacle. A public comment forum was established that allowed for input on revisions to the Registrar Accreditation Agreement. Neither the BC nor the NCUC provided any comments to this forum -- none at all -- that pretty much sums up the degree of interest they have in protecting the general registrant community. best regards, Danny --- Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
Hello all,
So far as I can tell, registrants are already 'represented' by two existing ICANN constituencies; for-profits through the Business Constituency and non-profits through NCUC. Certainly, looking through things such as the two above groups' responses to the Domain Tasting issue, they certainly took the point of view of those two groups.
This means, the remaining "unrepresented" group is the that of "individual" registrants, who probably don't share much interest in common with those who -- to use ICANN lingo -- "monetize" domains through a number of tactics, many of which do no serve the public good.
I've certainly taken to heart comments about mission bloat of ICANN and, indeed, general bloat. Could it not be said that the interest-group of "individual registrants is, indeed, a subgroup of At-Large that shares most of ALAC's interests but has some additional ones of its own? Is this group -- which probably represents a single-digit percentage of total domain registrations -- really in need of a whole separate ICANN infrastructure?
I'd like to offer a counter-proposal to Danny's, one that's easier to implement and serves a wider audience. It'd like to suggest a permanent Working Group of ALAC devoted to registrant issues, led by Danny. That could be implemented quickly, and provide a source for policy and resources that could be very valuable to the whole community, including Internet users who are potential registrants. While not everyone in the world cares about Registerfly, ALAC _should_ care about the manner in which non-corporate registrants are treated by all registrars and registries be the gTLDs or ccTLDs. Personal registrants probably domain tasting, while corporate registrants are -- almost by definition -- the only group that would prefer retaining the practice.
Anyway, I'll suggest that as something to consider.
- Evan
------ NA-Discuss mailing list NA-Discuss@atlarge-lists.icann.org
http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/na-discuss_atlarge-lists.ica...
Visit the NA-RALO Wiki at https://st.icann.org/naralo/ ------
____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ