Sorry, I should have been clearer - probably my fault.
Things are logical in my
head - sometimes I do not write down correctly.
If you do not understand or if
I do not explain myself properly - please let me know.
I said, "Just an idea on
this phase for new TLD applicants."
TLD APPLICANTS - BEING CONSIDERED BY ICANN.
being - rather than having all this chaos for customers of domains not knowing if
a TLD is in with a faint chance of getting accepted for full status TLD - ICANN have
a system set up for this.
They have no proper plan set up for this phase.
that there is not hundreds of illegitimate .shop.blinkinganything.dotanythings selling
domains to customers - spinning the lie that it may be accepted as the .shop TLD.
consider this a con - of the type we have just seen on Sunrise and Landrush - were
there may be no 'prize'.
Simon, I have no doubt that you have great desire for
new.net - it is indeed a thorn in ICANNs side.
I have some misgivings, so will
reserve my final judgement.
To answer your question:
Are you seriously saying,
that ICANN will allow new.net the .shop TLD?
--> I never said that, where did
you get that?
But I think whenever there is a next round of introducing new TLDs,
New.net will THE player that couldn't be ignorated by ICANN. Maybe new.net could
select two or three of their domains for the USG root. But ICANN won't duplicate
TLDs from New.net because this would really lead to confusion: 71 mil (maybe more
in the future) users will get New.nets domains, the others will get the ICANN domains.
could duplicate .info, .biz, .pro, .name because they are carried in roots that are
accessible by not many people and there is nearly zero content.
So new net is better
because it can be accessed by millions of people?
I can certainly understand that
logic - and agree to a certain extent - but it fails to take many things into account.
are others on this board who could give better argument than I about this.
thinking primarily of Christopher Ambler with .web - "they are carried in roots that
are accessible by not many people".
But you qualified that with, "and there is
nearly zero content."
How many customers would he have to get before deserving
a chance at USG root?
Why should he suffer for trying to show 'proof of concept'
on alternate root?