RE: [alac] .xxx rejected 9-5
I think that when the statements of vote of the individual directors will be out you can appreciate the wide difference of opinions and the complexity of the matter that has characterized this vote, and explains the length of the process. To me, the turning point has been the official statement of the GAC that has requested language in the contracts that the majority of the Board has felt not enforceable. But this is just the point of view of a non-voting liaison observing the shift in time. What is also interesting, and further shows the complexity of the issue, is that not only some who voted "Yes" in the previous round have voted "No" in this one (which is kind of obvious, since the majority vote shifted in this direction), but also that there were votes moving in the opposite direction. Anyway, I don't think that the creation or not of .xxx will have any major effect from the end users point of view, which is the one ALAC is supposed to take care of. IMHO, .xxx would have been a complete failure in achieving children protection, as the porn sites outside it would have proliferated anyway. I think that the only reason why in a year from now we will still be talking about it is the lawsuits that will follow. Incidentally, there would have been lawsuits also if the vote would have been the other way around. One director has put it quite bluntly in saying "I'm biting my tongue not to tell you 'I told you so'". I wholeheartedly second. Now, can we go back to business? Regards, Roberto GAETANO ALAC ICANN BoD Liaison From: Jean Armour Polly <mom@xxxxxxxxxx> To: ALAC@xxxxxxxxx Subject: [alac] .xxx rejected 9-5 Date: Wed, 10 May 2006 22:30:10 -0400 _________________________________________________________________ Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
|