Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: S. Hudgens
Date/Time: Wed, October 17, 2001 at 3:31 PM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: Image Online Design

Message:
 

 
        Every day that goes by without ICANN approving IOD's .web application adds more weight to the argument that ICANN is comprised of people who wouldn't know competency if it hit them head-on.

First off, I don't throw money away. I have used IOD's .web services for several reasons. Aside from the obvious fact that .web has the most potential of any TLD to date, IOD has proven themselves over and over again, clearly up to the task of running the .web registry.

For all the talk about openness and transparency, Image Online Design has actually delivered. Where ICANN's darling Afilias has failed time and time again on all counts, IOD has always seemed to go the extra mile. Where Afilias is more concerned about covering their ineptness with lame excuses and press releases, IOD has been working to improve their infrastructure to be able to deliver what was promised in their .web application.

In short, in each case where Afilias has shown themselves utterly incapable of running a registry, IOD has shown the skill and fortitude necessary to ensure a viable product.

It makes me angry and extremely disappointed that the one organization chosen to oversee the Internet (ICANN) has allowed this sham of a company (Afilias) the opportunity to operate a new TLD.

It is now time for ICANN to do two things. First, they must admit failure. Failure that they themselves lack the necessary competency to identify crappy business plans, and that they have totally lost control of the two best TLD's (.info and .biz) of the seven new ones chosen, which were, in my opinion, pathetic. Secondly, ICANN must admit that IOD can do what it outlined in its .web application, and look past whatever predjudices it harbors toward IOD.

It is now time for ICANN to approve IOD's .web, for there is simply no good reason not to.

S. Hudgens

     
 


Message Thread: