[governance] Proposed statement on .ORG sale

[Ayden Férdeline]

Hi John,

> there are millions of registrants in .org, and no
> practical way to survey them due both to the way registries work and
> the need to do it in a reasonable time.

Sure. I accept that.

But what, then, does the Board make of a petition being signed by 15,000 organizations and individuals, including some of the world's largest NGOs, and even statements opposing the sale signed by three of its own Chapters?

My point is, there is clear opposition to the sale from the non-commercial community, but few cheerleaders.

Bullet 6 states, "There will likely be significant difficulties in ascertaining the level of support for particular .org proposals from throughout the .org registrants and noncommercial community. Nevertheless, proposals to operate the .org TLD should provide available evidence of support from across the global Internet community."

ISOC has provided no such support.

All of the support I have seen for the sale has come from current or former ISOC and/or PIR board members, and people currently on ISOC's payroll, even on this mailing list. (By the way, I personally think people should be declaring such a conflict when they comment on this issue.)

> By the way, do you have any .org registrations?

With respect, what is the relevance of that question? I have no financial interest here. I have nothing to lose (directly) from the sale of PIR to Ethos Capital, and I have nothing to gain.

Indirectly, of course, I have much to lose as a non-commercial user of the Domain Name System from the Domain Name System being more commercialized. As we all do.

Best wishes,

Ayden Férdeline

‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
On Monday, December 9, 2019 12:08 AM, John Levine <icggov at johnlevine.com> wrote:

> In article g4EijeilVgYyEfP_JjWD7fEDeRytFG_mXFk0TUOKDj2EMORaqOoEwKnQ-feQVeuOGQE3DvU2SJ6tXAs3EU5eQMQ-txrsnfxzqUHH_J88QdY=@ferdeline.com you write:
>
> > -=-=-=-=-=-
> > Indeed John, this criteria is interesting, particularly number 6, which I have pasted below. I do not believe Ethos Capital has a "level of
> > support for the proposal from .ORG registrants," but the Internet Society did, and that is why .ORG was assigned to them over other bidders.
>
> Andrew responded to that question in the first live Q&A.
>
> To paraphase him, there are millions of registrants in .org, and no
> practical way to survey them due both to the way registries work and
> the need to do it in a reasonable time. (Registries are not allowed to
> contact registrants other than through the registrars.) He decided
> that the only survey anyone could do would really be a fake survey,
> and a fake survey is worse than no survey. I believe there's a
> recording of the call on the ISOC web site if you want to check that I
> summarized it correctly.
>
> There's been a great deal of noise on this list but I would be
> surprised if everyone who's ever posted had as many as 1000 .org
> registrations toal. That's 0.01% of the total.
>
> By the way, do you have any .org registrations? I checked and I have
> two, both of which have been sitting inactive autorenewing for 20
> years. I must be .org's favorite kind of customer.
>
> R's,
> John