Slashdot Mirror
Soviet Union TLD Owners Snub ICANN
An anonymous reader writes "New Scientist has up a post about ICANN's latest decisions about country-code TLDs. The body is making an effort to tackle the problem of Yugoslavia's .yu outliving the country by over a decade but is far from getting its way with the Soviet Union's domain .su. Around 2,500 new .su sites are created every year despite ICANN ordering its retirement — the disgruntled .su registrars have announced an 80 per cent price cut in the price of .su domains in response. 'It makes the much-publicized wrangles over the ".xxx" domain seem tiny by comparison. And it convinces me of the need to reevaluate the existence of the US Dept of Commerce-backed non-profit organisation that is ICANN. The current squabbles are petty compared to the diplomatic arguments that TLDs could cause. An international body like the UN would be a more appropriate overseer, surely?'"
Its really because the US wants the domain for after the next "elections" ... for Soviet USA (.su)
After all, no habeus corpus, no posse comitas, the constitution is "just a damn piece of paper", the US economy on a death spiral, people being sent off to fight wars of imperialism, ... you'd think that the Soviet Union *won* the cold war.
Kevin Smith on Prince
There's a good reason for that. It's because Taiwan is not a country. It is an inalienable part of China, and the UN, including the Secretary-General who made a direct statement, affirmed that for the umpteenth time just yesterday.
I'm not quite sure why you included this - unless you assumed that I was German? No, I'm British. Jan Rinok is not my real name - are you really called StealthyRoid? Perhaps it was an attempt at an insult. If so, it seems to have failed spectacularly, but your post is currently already assessed as being flamebait so it seems some others agree with me.
If I recall correctly, don't you still have the death penalty in Texas and several other states? Now, how barbaric is that? Rates you alongside China and many other places that you probably don't admire too much. (http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0777460.html) But your Government - whether you support it or not - still expect to be able to sit in the UN and even, like very few other countries, have a veto over many issues. So why is wrong for one country which has policies with which some might disagree to expect to have a role to play in the UN but the USA expects to be treated differently. I do not support what every other nation does but they are all sovereign nations. If we wish to change what they do it should be through education, through persuasion, through discussion (without expletives) and through diplomacy. But you said it better than I could - "you've got to also concede that the practices engaged in by that government, including brutal, horrible ones....., are not inconsistent with that role". Seems that your argument is in tatters now, at least from where I'm sitting.
The point that the original poster was making is that very few, if any, organisations, governments, committees or whatever are perfect. The UN is, in many people's opinion, at least no worse than the Government of your country or mine. Now, we may not like that, but it doesn't mean that they don't have a role to play or a job to fulfill. So suggesting that the UN should be considered for the role of DNS supervisor is not ridiculous although it will not get my support. I take it from your comments that it won't be getting your support either. So, it wasn't a case of my not understanding but simply disagreeing with your point of view.
Also, ask your mom about things that are bigger in Texas sometime. Then give her a kiss for me.Another failed insult, but at least I could see the intended humour. I don't think that you ever met my Mum, she would have remembered someone like you - but not for the reasons that you suggest.
Now, haven't you got a hat and boots to wear and a horse to ride, or something?
Have a look at soylentnews.org for a different view