[gnso-vi-feb10] Homework assignment and other issues

["Tim Ruiz" <tim@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Mikey/Berry,

I appreciate your efforts on the homework assignment and the attempt to
keep this moving forward, but I find the spreadsheet too restrictive and
open to intrepretation as to what the answers mean, how they will be
used, and how the comments will be taken into account. So I won't be
completing one, but also expect that my views/concerns will still be
taken into account regarding any evaluation of consensus.

I will instead point to the Go Daddy proposal again and just say that so
far we have heard few valid arguments for moving off of the positions we
have taken in that proposal, although I recognize that perhaps some
clarifications might be needed. For the few good arguments we have
heard, we are still considering those (particulary in regards to backend
service providers and Community gTLDs).

Some other comments pertaining to the various threads, the last call,
and the economists:

IMO, it seems clear that the economists on the call did not do a
thorough analysis of all aspects of the domain name market. I appreciate
that they have a particular opinion, but other economists have had just
as strong an opinion the other way (Sappington, for example). So until
an appropriately framed comprehensive study of CO/VI in relation to the
domain name market is done, versus the ad hoc approach so far taken, I
don't find any value in one opinion over another.

Regarding the debate on equal access and the use of registrars, a point
that seems to be missed is that within any gTLD competition exists ONLY
at the registrar level right now. There is only one .com registry, one
.biz registry, only one .info registry, and there will be only one each
.whatever registry. Competition exists within a name space due to the
Accredited Registrar paradigm. Any change in that should be taken
cautiously, and only after appropriate study as I mentioned above. Any
rush to throw something out there in time for the first round (assuming
it isn't delayed any further) would be a mistake.

There is no evidence, only speculation, that any new gTLD will need help
to survive due to a lack of registrar support. In fact, the evidence so
far is just the opposite - EVERY existing gTLD has MULTIPLE registrars
supporting it. Any difficulty these registries have has more to do with
their own business model and marketing than with any problems getting
registrar support. And just maybe, some gTLDs will never make it no
matter what. If no one wants it, if the string sucks, there is nothing
that can be done about that.


Tim