A cynical person might suspect that the proposed restrictions
on .org are intended
to drive users away from .org and into
TLDs which are more profitable to VeriSign.
An even more
cynical person might suggest that the current .org controversy
was
manufactured to draw attention away from other flaws in
the proposal. I'm
not quite cynical enough to believe that
this was the intent, but I fear that
it will be the end result.In the larger scheme of things, I don't understand why
creating
new TLDs should be such a big deal. If I want to create
foobar.com
(just an example; it's already taken), all I have to
do is register it.
If I want to create foobar.foo, I have to
go through a vastly expensive bureaucratic
process that is very
likely to fail. I'm sure there are sound technical
reasons why
creating a new TLD is more difficult than creating a new second
level
domain name, but I doubt that they justify the extreme
level of bureaucracy that
has been imposed on the process.
ICANN recently reviewed a number of proposals
for new TLDs;
what was the real justification for rejecting *any* of them?
|
|
|