4 ms·

It's not entirely different, but those were the rules everyone was playing by then. So in that sense it's very different. We haven't agreed to these new rules y

It's not entirely different, but those were the rules everyone was playing by then. So in that sense it's very different. We haven't agreed to these new rules yet. I don't think we should. Hopefully that's not too subtle.

larrys 14y ago
"We haven't agreed to these new rules yet." Who's "we" sucka? (Sorry - see 2:17 in on the following had to crack a rare joke): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoXDzsuqXFg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoXDzsuqXFg "the rules everyone was playing by then" The rules are clearly laid out now. The difference is that you need to be able to pay real money to play now. Some of that is greed and some is practical. You need to limit the applicants to organizations with the financial wherewithal to be able to provide the stability needed (that said they do have some kind of program for less financially worth non-profits). "I don't think we should." To late for this now. The time to do that was many years ago when comments were invited and there were meetings etc. By the way there are many parts to the ICANN process that are exclusionary. To get to one of their meetings you have to be able to afford to get in an airplane and fly to an exotic (and sometimes) unsafe location. Nothing fair about that. But that is the way things are (in Washington as well).
- mapgrep 14y ago
  > You need to limit the applicants to organizations with the financial wherewithal to be able to provide the stability needed Right, like Sun, Netscape, Digital Equipment Corporation, Silicon Graphics, GM, Lehman Brothers, etc. If any industry should know that "financial wherewithall" != stability, it's the technology industry.
- davewiner 14y ago
  We as in the users of the Internet.
  - larrys 14y ago
    Meanwhile the gTLD director resigned yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4147181 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4147181
quag 14y ago
What about a kid who was born in 1997 and who is now turning 15? They didn't get a chance to play by the same rules as you did.

larrys 14y ago

"We haven't agreed to these new rules yet." Who's "we" sucka? (Sorry - see 2:17 in on the following had to crack a rare joke): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoXDzsuqXFg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoXDzsuqXFg "the rules everyone was playing by then" The rules are clearly laid out now. The difference is that you need to be able to pay real money to play now. Some of that is greed and some is practical. You need to limit the applicants to organizations with the financial wherewithal to be able to provide the stability needed (that said they do have some kind of program for less financially worth non-profits). "I don't think we should." To late for this now. The time to do that was many years ago when comments were invited and there were meetings etc. By the way there are many parts to the ICANN process that are exclusionary. To get to one of their meetings you have to be able to afford to get in an airplane and fly to an exotic (and sometimes) unsafe location. Nothing fair about that. But that is the way things are (in Washington as well).

mapgrep 14y ago
> You need to limit the applicants to organizations with the financial wherewithal to be able to provide the stability needed Right, like Sun, Netscape, Digital Equipment Corporation, Silicon Graphics, GM, Lehman Brothers, etc. If any industry should know that "financial wherewithall" != stability, it's the technology industry.
davewiner 14y ago
We as in the users of the Internet.
- larrys 14y ago
  Meanwhile the gTLD director resigned yesterday: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4147181 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4147181

quag 14y ago

What about a kid who was born in 1997 and who is now turning 15? They didn't get a chance to play by the same rules as you did.