Re: [ga] Responses by .biz/info/org Registry Operators are Unacceptable

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

When I say nonprofit, I mean public benefit, with the proper credentials in
their country for that designation. No one intends to judge who is doing
real good or not, just that they are legally a nonprofit. People still need
to check orgs out before donating to them, however it wouldn't be open to
people who have not even bothered to file the legal paperwork.

Charities with a legitimate purpose do not want to be associated with a TLD
that also has porn sites associated with it. Creating this TLD would perform
a public service. And Karl, making a judgement on what use a TLD has or has
not seems against the principles of one who wants to start a dot ewe, which
others might feel equally unnecessary.

Not yours or mine to judge.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Auerbach" <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "George Kirikos" <gkirikos@xxxxxxxxx>; <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
<info-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx>; <org-tld-agreement@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, October 18, 2006 5:55 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] Responses by .biz/info/org Registry Operators are
Unacceptable


> kidsearch wrote:
>
> > We desperately need a REAL nonprofit TLD such as .NPO that is managed by
a
> > true nonprofit for true nonprofits.
>
> Might I suggest that we eliminate the idea that TLDs are some sort of
> semantic containers?
>
> DNS was not designed as a semantic directory.  It serves, quite poorly,
> in that role only because, before there were search engines, people got
> used to using it as a crude tool.
>
> Consider the idea of ".kids" - is it a TLD about young goats or human
> children?  And ".cat" - is it about Catalonian, about domesticated
> felines, or about boats with two parallel hulls?
>
> And isn't imposing an English word onto a TLD a kind of Anglo-American
> hubris?
>
> Consider the issue of what is a "non profit".  First of all, "non
> profit" is not synonymous with "non governmental".
>
> Second "non profit" is something which does not mean that the body is
> somehow beneficent and in the public interest.  For example, here in
> California, one category of "non profit" corporations are religious
> institutions.  That is a clearly separate category from "public benefit"
> corporations (ICANN lives under this category.)
>
> Non profit does not mean that the principals are unpaid or poorly paid -
> often non profit structures are simply legal shadows for money pumps
> into the pockets of the executives.
>
> To my mind the ultimate example of the dangers of using a TLD as a
> category was when someone came to me and asked about the possibility of
> establishing a TLD for Christians.  I pointed out that history is filled
> with wars about who is or who is not a Christian.  Can you imagine the
> anger that would be generated if someone set themselves up as the
> "official internet" judge of who is or is not a Christian, Jew, Muslim,
> Buddist, etc, etc?
>
> Now, if ICANN were to do what it has never done - which is to start
> granting TLD slots at a reasonable rate (one per day would be fine by
> me, but I'd be happy with one a week) without intrusive inspection of
> purposes, business plans, or any other non-technical matter - then TLDs
> could arise that garner meaning through use rather than having an
> arbitrary meaning endowed upon it by ICANN.
>
> --karl--
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.5/483 - Release Date: 10/18/06
>
>