Received: from blizzard.odi.com (blizzard [198.3.23.25]) by mineshaft.odi.com (8.8.8/EX3.5) with ESMTP id KAA06235 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:34:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from odi.com (sphere [198.3.17.196]) by blizzard.odi.com (8.8.8/IN3.4) with ESMTP id KAA24563 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:35:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3757E438.C4B86EE7@odi.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 10:35:36 -0400 From: Jim Williams Organization: Object Design, 25 Mall Rd, Burlington, MA 01803 - 617-674-5355 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov Subject: Re: ICIIU proposals for the public sector use of .US References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Tell that to the Rational Anarchy crowd, or the Free Information groups. In fact, the position of the Free Information groups points out the flaw in your notion -- charging for domain names is a tax on speech. You are telling them to do that to which they are objecting in order to acquire the right to speak within the forum of the .us domain name space. Jim. (Information.wants.to.be.free.us) Allan Bennett wrote: > > John did not say the value of a organization is how much they collect. Only > that, which I agree, how affective is an organization where no one is > willing to contribute money, to pay for a domain? When as per early threads > we learned a domain name will be more important than air to breath or water > to drink. > > Allan > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jim Williams [mailto:jlw@odi.com] > Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 7:36 AM > To: .US reorg. list > Subject: Re: ICIIU proposals for the public sector use of .US > > I find your criteria for valuing the worth of an organization > downright repugnant. > > Jim. > > John B. Reynolds wrote: > > > > As I stated earlier today in another discussion, I see no reason to > provide > > taxpayer-funded domains to anyone. For individuals, they're an > inexpensive > > luxury item. Community organizations and other non-profits may have more > of > > a need for them, but not to the extent that it justifies public subsidies. > > Besides, any group that can't raise $25-50/year for a domain name and > > $20/month to operate it isn't likely to be a very effective organization. > > > > Michael Sondow wrote: > > > > > > The following comment regarding the reorganization of the .US domain > > > space has been submitted to the NTIA, and is offered here for public > > > comment. > > > > > > > > > U.S. Department of Commerce > > > NTIA/OIA Room 4701 > > > 14th and Constitution Avenue NW > > > Washington DC 20230 > > > > > > To whom it may concern; > > > > > > The ICIIU has previously submitted comments to the NTIA on the > > > reorganization of the .US domain space and, although we were unable > > > to participate in the March 9th meeting in Washington, the ICIIU, as > > > a vehicle for the expression of independent Internet users and the > > > public sector, remains actively committed to a .US space organized > > > with these interests in mind. In that spirit, the ICIIU offers for > > > consideration the following principles, which we believe would form > > > a reasonable basis for organization and allocation of domain names > > > within .US: > > > > > > 1. The creation, promoted by the U.S. Government, of a network of > > > non-profit connectivity providers belonging to the public sector, > > > organized by state in the 50 states of the U.S. Such public sector > > > ISPs would be allocated blocks of IP addresses and perform the task > > > of registering domain names for individuals and non-commercial > > > entities so that commercial ISPs, whose financial requirements may > > > not permit them to function properly as public sector registrars, > > > will not be burdened by this work and perform it inefficiently. > > > > > > 2. The promotion by such state registrars of state-wide networks of > > > public sector non-profit sub-registrars for the registration of > > > regional and city subdomains, for the specific purpose of creating > > > community networks. The Federal Government, in collaboration with > > > the state governments, would create funding and organizational > > > mechanisms, and provide information and assistance to local > > > communities, for these community networks on a state-wide and > > > national scale. > > > > > > 3. If it is decided to allocate domain names within the same > > > subdivisions - geographical or otherwise - of .US for commercial > > > purposes, the creation of a nomenclature specific to individual and > > > non-commercial domain name use, so that the problems that have > > > occurred in the gTLDs, and the prejudice to non-commercial and > > > individual users that those problems has entailed, will not be > > > repeated. > > > > > > 4. The publication and distribution, by the state and national > > > registration entites, of detailed lists and diagrams of the > > > non-profit and community network domain names in use. This > > > information will promote the inter-relatedness and interconnectivity > > > of the public sector and community network registrants, and benefit > > > their development and that of the public sector use of .US in > > > general. > > > > > > 5. The creation of a web-based registration template procedure, > > > conformed for all States, so that individual and non-commercial > > > registrants will have control over their domain names, and so that > > > the public sector registrants will not be unduly burdened by the > > > day-to-day handling of names and addresses and can devote their > > > resources to technical improvements and the production of > > > educational and informational materials. > > > > > > > > > Yours, > > > > > > Michael Sondow (for the ICIIU) > > > > > > ============================================================ > > > "We need to be able to judge which is more important - the > > > images on the screen, the mechanisms that produce them, or > > > the world that they are striving to represent." > > > > > > --Oscar Kenshur, in 'The Allure of the Hybrid' > > > ============================================================ > > > International Congress of Independent Internet Users (ICIIU) > > > http://www.iciiu.org iciiu@iciiu.org > > > ============================================================ > > > . Received: from blizzard.odi.com (blizzard [198.3.23.25]) by mineshaft.odi.com (8.8.8/EX3.5) with ESMTP id KAA06721 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:48:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from odi.com (sphere [198.3.17.196]) by blizzard.odi.com (8.8.8/IN3.4) with ESMTP id KAA27714 for ; Fri, 4 Jun 1999 10:49:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3757E789.8525D842@odi.com> Date: Fri, 04 Jun 1999 10:49:45 -0400 From: Jim Williams Organization: Object Design, 25 Mall Rd, Burlington, MA 01803 - 617-674-5355 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.06 [en] (WinNT; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: us-list@ntiant1.ntia.doc.gov Subject: Re: .us - various issues References: <007a01beae08$2ff6afe0$51540518@CJ52269-A.alex1.va.home.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit domainiac wrote: .... > > -commercial use. I think the people complaining about commercial use of the > .us domains (or sending commercial messages to this list) are misguided. If > there is not a commercial use of the .us it will never amount to much. The > fact is that operating a domain system costs time and money and none of the > complainers seem to be willing to put up their funds. I would much rather Since I think this should be funded out of the general fund (our taxes), I have no problem with putting up my share. > pay a small fee than deal with some delegated volunteer hostmaster who has a > distorted view of the world. Those that think there are all these > volunteers willing to do the work, supply the equipment, and coordinate > their efforts are dreaming. > > I would not object for preserving parts of the .US for non-commercial use > (even subsidized). However, once you get into these classifications it > costs time and money to administer such a plan and verify who is commercial, > etc. Also, this distinction is often impossible to make. The whole idea is > to generate commercial use of the space, not stop it. I would like to see > more ideas on commercial use (and yes, that includes a business plan to pay > the bills and plan for scalability if it should grow). Calling the > registrars who are charging a reasonable fee "greedy" is also not valid. > You get what you pay for. I don't see the whole idea as generating commercial use. In fact, I see commercial use as rather unnecessary. I don't object to commercial use, but I do object to the notion that commercial use should have any significant impact upon the design of the .us namespace. The .us namespace should belong to the people of the U.S., not the corporations of the U.S.. They've already got a namespace. .... Jim. .