This post from Icannwatch.org, hits a nail on the head!!!!!!!!!
IOD to ICANN: Whatever You Say (as long as we're in) (Score: 0)
by Anonymous on
Friday, July 13 @ 00:01:00 MDT
Doesn't sound like a situation that is anywhere
near being within the spirit of opening competition now does it?
Such an outrageous
barrier to entry is anti-competitive and only serves to prove that ICANN violates
the "public trust" as Mr Lynn likes to call it.
You can add to this little deceptive
maneuver the fact that it was slipped in after the fact, like in after everyone ponies
up a $50,000 lottery fee,
which in the case of Afilias was $50,000 split between
their 19 members and of those we find most of the largest established players in
the currently in the market.
What a set up, ICANN hands out 7 new tlds only 2
of which would be considered most likely to offer the most revenue, and of course
who get's em?
The big established players.
That way whatever threat the new
tlds might pose is really a mute point because the big players well, have no downside
at all, Now do they?
This is ICANN's warped view of competition and as far as
"proof of concept" is concerned and devoid of the nonsense about crashing the net.
What the hell are they trying to prove?
Can anyone show me where
to find the document that spells out exactly what concepts need to be proven so we
all can follow right along and determine whether things are on the up and up.
right it's all a mystery and the reason it is simple, ICANN gets to make it up as
they please, when they please, and then ram it down our throats and call it "consensus"
For that matter, where can one find the pre-set criteria that determined who was
or wasn't a worthy applicant in the new tld process?
That's right you can't find
If ICANN were an honest and professional organization, then predetermined
criteria would have been made available so one would know if they qualified or not,
and if ICANN knew without a shadow of a doubt that they would pick so few tlds, (which
by the way they halfway got right in explaining beforehand but it was still purposely
ambiguous like the whole process in general) then they had no business approaching
the issue of an application fee as they did. They certainly didn't discourage applications
did they, more like they took every moment to mention the all important $50,000.
Oh and did I mention that Ken Stubbs, then Chairman of the Names Council of the
Domain Name Supporting Organization of ICANN was also on the Board of Afilias.
that's right the same Afilias that was granted .Info
ICANN and the word public
trust being used together is an oxymoron.
Morons! yeah that about sums it up.
What a disgrace.