Return to Proposed Revisions to NSI Agreements Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username: cbloodworth
Date/Time: Wed, March 21, 2001 at 4:10 AM GMT
Browser: Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.01 using Windows 98
Score: 5
Subject: Mostly agree


Most of what you talked about is stuff that I (and most in here) don't care about.  Unless you are going to go all the way and reform ICANN and get VeriSign out of the picture completely, it really doesn't make that much difference one way or the other.

I'm not in any position to be able to discuss the the technical merits of either plan, so I wont.

Talking about the current panic to make .ORG soley 'non profit', you said:

I am inclined to think that it was purposely left out because, if it were not true (just a rumor), I think that someone from ICANN would have been responding to this lengthy forum to set us all straight.

I agree with your statement.

Frankly, that is one of the two reasons I feel it's true.

The other reason is because a few days after this forum opened, and the stink began about .ORG, somebody from ICANN *did* post in here and talked about about needing an appropriate transition period, etc.

Technically, he didn't deny it.  It would have only taken one sentence to disagree.  Instead, he talked about giving a graceful transition period.  That's pretty much agreeing with what was being said.  (And from their eyes, they may even think that's a generous offer.)  Even if it's not explicitly stated, it had apparently been discussed and planned.

I think he used the term "non-commercial" (although don't hold me to that, because I can't find the message), and it could be interpreted as meaning 'allow anybody to own and run a .ORG as long as no money is being made'.

However, that would be very hard to enforce.  (Hmmm.... My domain / web host puts ads on my web pages.  They are making money.  Would that violate the 'non commercial' status?)

And considering the anger in this forum, they could go a long way to calming us down by just coming in here and telling us *officially* that the rumor isn't true, etc.  That we are wrong.  (Of course, then we have to trust them, but that's a seperate issue.)

The fact that they haven't even done that after all this time says fairly clearly either 1) they don't care what we think, or 2) that we are right.

Frankly, I'm inclined to believe both, since it would only take 10 minutes for somebody to come in here and mostly calm us down.  Or better yet, to make an official statement on the web page or in a press release.


Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy