Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

More About The .org Reassignment

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the organismus dept.

Joel Rowbottom writes: "After ICANN 'awarded' ISOC with the running of .ORG in the Draft Staff Report, public comments regarding the process are starting to come out of the woodwork. Eric Brunner-Williams has commented on the flawed scoring and ICANN allegedly using the process to financially shore up ISOC and Afilias; the dotORG Foundation have posted some comments and questions (quote: 'we are perplexed by the Academic CIO Team's rating of our bid's technology as marginal'); Carl Malamud has posted the IMS/ISC response; and Organic have posted a rather damning indictment of the process as well (disclaimer: I work for Organic Names). For the $27,000 it cost each bidder to 'participate' (and that's just the entry fee), we'd have expected a little more professionalism than just getting some 'free' t-shirts! Comment to ICANN today org-eval@icann.org and make a difference."

2 of 98 comments (clear)

  1. Can someone answer a simple question for me? by jfedor · · Score: 5, Interesting

    After all those reassignments and reorganizations, will they let me keep my .org domain if I'm not a non-profit organization (I'm not a for profit organization either)?

    Has it been decided yet? What if I paid for many years in advance?

    Thanks.

    -jfedor

    1. Re:Can someone answer a simple question for me? by karl.auerbach · · Score: 5, Interesting
      At the March 2002 ICANN board meeting in Accra (Ghana) there was a resololution about .org. My notes might help answer your question. (See http://www.cavebear.com/icann-board/diary/march-14 -2002.htm [You'll need to search for ".org"]):

      I made it clear that I felt that .org should remain an open TLD, that no conditions be placed on those who wish to enter new names into .org or to renew existing names. I would have preferred that this policy be written directly into the resolution. However, board appeared to agree that rather than taking the time to amend the resolution that the board express its sense that ICANN management follow that expressed policy. We will soon find out whether ICANN's management follows that expression.


      And ICANN's "staff" would never try to do something behind the back the members of its Board of Directors would they?