Karl and all,
You are exactly correct that constituencies are a bad and
nearly indefinable thing to a certainty and as well very divisive
as we are now beginning to see and will see much more of in the coming
months, maybe even years.. We and you warned that such a model for
a DNSO was a mistake. We are now going to see just how big a
mistake it is....
Karl Auerbach wrote:
> > I think we should leave the constituency open to any non-commercial
> > individual or organization. The definition of "non-commercial," however,
> > should not be "non-profit." The ICC and INTA are both "non-profit"
> > entities, but their purpose is to vigorously promote commercial
> > interests. This constituency obviously was not meant for them.*
>
> We are entering definitional hell. How does one measure "commercial" use,
> or lack of commercial use? Is it measured by the activity of the holder
> of the domain or by those who actually pass traffic with that domain name
> in some header or address or name field? Is there a threshold under which
> profit-making activity would be considered too small to be "commercial"?
> Do parents get to leverage domains given to children (it seems that they
> can with regard to political contributions, so why not voting on dns
> matters?)
>
> Classifying people into constituencies is "a bad thing"(tm).
>
> --karl--
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
