Return to New TLD Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: Garry Anderson
Date/Time: Sat, November 17, 2001 at 10:02 AM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Subject: ICANN has well exceeded its narrow technical mandate


This quote says it all, "ICANN has well exceeded its narrow technical mandate"

As some people on this board will know, I am for seperate and restricted TLD to verify source. This is quite apart from .REG - To see why, please visit:

Any ***OPEN*** repeat OPEN TLD, like .com, should not have words abridged - that is against First Amendment. The US Government are either too corrupt or too ignorant to see that.

As they have been told and understand the arguments (though it was VERY obvious they must have known) - then they must be corrupt.


The authorities are without honour - they hide this from you.

Another quote from the link Sunil (Anion) provided shows that others can see the positive aspects of restricted TLD:

To do that, Gaon and company have come up with a three-step process to validate .pro candidates"

1. Domain name registration
2. Authentication and verification; proof is required for all doctors, lawyers and accountants candidates, requiring a background check to organizations like the American Medical Association.
3. Issuing a client digital certificate to all .pro domain name holders, as proof of their credentials.



Message Thread:

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy