George:

You know how I feel about WLS (hate it) and you know how I feel about the process that resulted in it (absurd). I will not and cannot defend it.

My comments about ICANN are global. The good news is there are very, very few substantive items where we (Tucows) and our customers disagree with respect to what policy should be. Unfortunately, to date resellers have caused a lot of heat and very little light (George you are a notable exception to this and should be commended for your participation). This is our failing. We have not done a good job of making it easier for you all to participate to the extent you should. We need to be smart about ways to make that easy for you all to do.

We want the same things, but we need to figure out the road to get there. The rest is just theory. Now back to business.

Regards

On Sunday, February 2, 2003, at 08:42 AM, George Kirikos wrote:

Hello,

--- elliot noss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Patrick, I don't think openness equals agreeing with you. I think
your
email proves MY point. You describe in great detail all the
opportunities you had for input. There is NO requirement that you get

your way or that people agree with you. With respect to alt root
issues
I don't.
A perfect example of ICANN not doing the proper thing was WLS, though.
They ignored the consensus process and recommendation of the Names
Council that WLS be rejected, yet they've approved it - subject to an
ongoing appeal, that they've never really acknowledged; it's been on
the backburner since September 2002, see:

http://www.icann.org/correspondence/brannon-letter-to-lynn-09sep02.htm

I'm all for how ICANN is *suppposed* to work, but it's clear that in
this case they ignored their own procedures, waved their hands about
and accepted WLS anyway. Thankfully, there are contracts in place with
Registrars to allow them to challenge this (we've managed to delay WLS
by 18 months; could be even longer), but in other cases where there are
not, folks are left scratching their heads, crying, or frustrated....

I don't mind "losing" a debate, when the other side has shown a massive
consensus, etc., but our side "won" the WLS issue, overwhelmingly in
the constituencies, yet still "lost" due to the Board shenanigans.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/




Reply via email to