[NA-Discuss] Fwd: Edits and comments to NARALO/ALAC position statement on GAC scorecard

[Evan Leibovitch]

On 31 March 2011 13:52, Richard Tindal <richardtindal at me.com> wrote:


> You don't see this as a major problem for deferred applicants, whereas I
> think it would be very harmful to some applicants (and their prospective
> users).
>

Whether I see this (deferral) as a major problem for applicants is fairly
irrelevant. This is At-Large, after all, which exists to protect the
interests of end-users of the Internet who, by and large, are not even
registrants. They're not even part of the ICANN food chain.

I care more about harm to end users than I care about harm to applicants.
And end user concerns are VERY, VERY different.

So basing any argument here about

You have not demonstrated (sufficiently to me, at least) that end users are
harmed by delay. Not registrants, end users.

Is there ANY instance that one could name in which the public has been
deprived of original Internet content because of limitations of the existing
namespace?

It is interesting to note Antony's chronology, and the observation that as
ALAC has grown more democratic and less appointed, it has cooled to the gTLD
hysteria about gTLDs shared by ICANN's more-vested interests. Correlation
does not necessarily infer causality, but I do think there's a definite
connection here. The more At-Large reflects the Internet end user, and the
more that the end user community knows about ICANN, the less it cares about
the panic rush for more TLDs.

The only exception to this is the IDN fast track for ccTLDs, which did have
end-user demand (and my full support).

- Evan