[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Stuart Lynn's proposed action plan suffers from undue reliance upon anecdotal evidence that has tainted his appraisal of the situation. Comments such as "In any event, there appears to be little demand right now for new unsponsored TLDs – at least, no one is banging at my door", are indicative of a failure to recognize that which has become readily apparent to the Department of Commerce and others -- namely, that continued concerns regarding undefined processes, procedures and standards for ensuring predictability and transparency in the gTLD selection process have had a deleterious effect... when the Community is of the belief that TLDs will only be parceled out in bits and pieces in a rigged game to favored ICANN insiders (for example to Business Constituency members such as Ron Andruff and Patrick Murphy of Tralliance Corporation and IATA respectively), there is little incentive for anyone else to bang on Stuart's door. For ICANN to be successful it must act to garner the full support and confidence of the global Internet community. This will not happen in a climate devoid of trust and in which it appears that predictability only means that select insiders will get the nod. Stuart Lynn has argued that "It is hard to find anyone who would argue that tens or perhaps even hundreds of new small- to medium-sized gTLDs could not be safely added (as opposed to thousands or tens of thousands – numbers which have raised concerns among some in the technical community), particularly if there were careful monitoring of overall DNS performance as the new gTLDs were introduced." If ICANN seeks to comply with Department of Commerce directives to restore community confidence it should begin by vastly opening up the gTLD selection process to allow for far more TLDs than the scant three that have been recommended. Limiting the selection to a mere few will only fuel the belief that the gTLD selection process remains perversely tainted and is designed to protect entrenched interests at the expense of all others.