Page,I do appreciate your
reply. I certainly realise that your mandate begins and ends with the management
of a registry of the domain name space, and that you won't be creating the content
or the sites which fit within this space. Nevertheless, as I'm sure you realise,
the policies and technical practices you put in place for this domain name will impact
significantly on the type of content that emerges within it.
I simply think young
people should be active shareholders/stakeholders in this organisation you are creating,
for this is *their* space. I think your proposal demonstrates an ignorance of the
real needs of young people.
A good example is actually something you mentioned...
You will be giving discounted domain names to young people to develop their own sites
- these, for example, might be $19.95. Have you considered, for instance, that while
$19.95 might be an accessible amount for a kid in the United States or here in Australia
(although it would mean saving up for a few months worth of pocket money!), it is
more than some of their parents earn in an entire month (!) in the majority of the
world. This is a major flaw in your model, one that would have stood out immediately
if you had put together a panel of young people to critique, even completely plan
the model.
Then there is the issue of filtering vs free. It's a fraught issue,
both for young people and for adults. I'm not going to say that filtering is bad
(but I do encourage you to visit http://www.peacefire.org). But the only way you
will create legitimacy for whatever position you decide is by actively involving
all stakeholders, especially young people in the decision making process. My belief
is that the majority of young people are very concerned about what is available (and
not suitable) online, but nevertheless are against filtering. I think some extensive
community consultations, not only in the USA, but also globally (for, as another
poster rightly pointed out, this is a global domain space) are in order.
With regard
to profits, I think it is only right that if no youth-based or international organisation
(such as UNICEF) is willing to take on this space, then that responsbility should
fall into the hands of a company. And it is only right that this company should be
allowed to make a fair profit on its investment. Neverthless, I think you need some
more structured form of on-going community giving.
The current model you have is
no good either: by selling the best domain names to the highest bidder, you deny
young people the right to these names. Surely the best names should be donated to
youth based cooperatives or organisations. I think the best thing to do would be
to charge a hefty premium (ie. $1million+) for those corporations which demand their
own trademarks, but do not necessarily focus entirely on youth -- for instance McDonalds
or Disney.
warm wishes,
Nick