Open Evaluation Process needed to develop objective criteria

["Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

IcannWatch has kindly published my paper on the New TLDs Evaluation Process, which includes 26 questions for the ICANN Board and/or Staff to answer.

 

Obviously I welcome any other inputs or comments from all constituencies and individuals.

 

The paper can be found here:

http://www.icannwatch.org/essays/henderson1.html and here:

http://www.theinternetchallenge.com/NewTLDsEvaluationProcess.htm

and a summary of the key questions here:

http://www.icannwatch.org/articles/03/10/24/1517224.shtml

 

I believe these are questions which merit responses. If future selection of NewgTLDs is to be carried out objectively, criteria need to be defined which draw on the experiences and lessons of the "Proof of Concept" testbed. While the proposed sTLDs may not be effected by all the issues involved in the Evaluation processes, they will certainly be effected by some - and the need for an independent and objective Evaluation Process is compelling, if open and objective criteria are to be evolved for future rounds of gTLDs. I express my concern that this evolution has been damaged by a lack of openness and accountability in the Evaluation Process, and by the non-availablilty of the Registry Evaluation Reports. How are we expected to engender informed participation, if essential data (NTEPPTF highlighted its importance) is withheld?

 

Thank you for your attention.

 

...

 

Richard Henderson