<div><div dir="auto">George,</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I agree with you on the need for objective data and metrics, which all too often is sorely lacking in gTLD policy development.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">As per my previous note, what are your thoughts on how to calculate-in the effect of blocking services on the analysis of the number of Sunrise registrations?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If "example.newgTLD" is 'registered' through a blocking service - such as the DPML , that domain is not registered during Sunrise across hundreds of gTLDs operated by the registry.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">In fact, the blocked domain represents the ultimate form of a defensive registration because it can not be used, and therefore no incremental benefits may accrue to the registrant (however slight).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I believe the issue is further complicated because we do not know how many domains have been blocked in this manner through these services.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Thanks!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Best,</div><div dir="auto">Claudio</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div>On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:28 AM George Kirikos <<a href="mailto:icann@leap.com">icann@leap.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello,<br>
<br>
On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 11:16 AM, Susan Payne <<a href="mailto:susan.payne@valideus.com" target="_blank">susan.payne@valideus.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> A handful of gamers does not equal a failing policy. Let's spend our time fruitfully addressing the gaming, rather than endlessly recirculating this argument.<br>
<br>
But, 130 sunrise registrations per TLD equals a "successful" policy?<br>
The *proportion* of gaming is a huge factor, combined with the<br>
absolute level of uptake, to tip the scales here, as well as the costs<br>
to other prospective legitimate registrants from jumping the queue.<br>
<br>
What exactly is the standard for a "failed" policy at ICANN? As Jeremy<br>
rightly stated, the evidence should not be ignored. For far too long,<br>
ICANN has not defined any "success" or "fail" metrics, and that must<br>
change.<br>
<br>
I can see why every sunrise is a "success" if part of your business is<br>
built upon consulting revenue for sunrises:<br>
<br>
<a href="https://valideus.com/services/validation-services" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://valideus.com/services/validation-services</a><br>
<br>
but most folks can easily adjust to a landrush-only system, instead,<br>
which is clearly superior overall. While some "sunrise consultants"<br>
might lose out, just as buggy whip producers went out of business,<br>
everyone else was better off -- that's progress. Indeed, some sunrise<br>
consultants might become "landrush consultants" instead...<br>
<br>
Sincerely,<br>
<br>
George Kirikos<br>
416-588-0269<br>
<a href="http://www.leap.com/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.leap.com/</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
gnso-rpm-wg mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org" target="_blank">gnso-rpm-wg@icann.org</a><br>
<a href="https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/gnso-rpm-wg</a><br>
</blockquote></div></div>