Having read many arguments from both sides, and having a strong background is both
.COM and .ORG worlds, I feel that the best policy is a reasonably gradual move towards
making .ORG the home of not-for-profit organizations. HOWEVER, I have specific caveats:
There can be no universal or enforceable definition of not-for-profit (which is why
I don't call it "non-profit", which has a specific legal meaning in the United States).
Therefore, I believe that the rules should be made clear as to what constitutes the
intent (see 2 below) and rely on VOLUNTARY compliance.
2) The intent of a definition
of "not-for-profit" should be, "an organization dedicated to providing products,
services or information to a larger community that is not designed to generate income
beyond reasonable expenses. An 'organization' shall normally be a group of people
or corporation who have a defined membership that is not restricted to the immediate
members of a single family." Please note that MY intent is to allow extended families
that organize for genealogical or social reasons to participate, but to exclude what
is commonly considered an immediate family living group (e.g., John_Mary.ORG).
The process by which this change should take place is in stages, with extensive public
notice before stage 1, then stage 1 where new registrations are affected, and then
stage 2 where .ORG domain owners are given a minimum of 12 months to make the change
to a more appropriate domain name.
It should be realized that there is no solution
that is going to make everyone happy. However, the current practice which encourages,
for instance, real estate brokers or companies to register CHICAGO.ORG, is not in
the public interest.