[CPWG] NYTimes: The .Org Mirage

[Jonathan Zuck]

I guess that was the motivation behind NGO which was meant to include some kind of validation. Of course, all the hate groups in the world would still get through if they registered themselves as non-profits. Also, John reminded us that a lot of the for-profit registrants are just doing defensive registrations.

That said, I wouldn’t mind disincentives to profiteering in the domain such as capping after market prices at documented cost of owning the domain. And certainly .ORG could use even more aggressive DNS Abuse protections such as those in use by .EU and .UK.,
Jonathan


From: Bill Jouris <b_jouris at yahoo.com>
Reply-To: "b_jouris at yahoo.com" <b_jouris at yahoo.com>
Date: Thursday, December 5, 2019 at 2:11 PM
To: "jmcc at hosterstats.com" <jmcc at hosterstats.com>, Jonathan Zuck <JZuck at innovatorsnetwork.org>, Evan Leibovitch <evanleibovitch at gmail.com>
Cc: CPWG <cpwg at icann.org>
Subject: Re: [CPWG] NYTimes: The .Org Mirage

It seems like the column could be an argument for putting constraints on .org registrations.  But that ought to be a separate discussion from the merits of this specific sale


Bill Jouris
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android<https://go.onelink.me/107872968?pid=InProduct&c=Global_Internal_YGrowth_AndroidEmailSig__AndroidUsers&af_wl=ym&af_sub1=Internal&af_sub2=Global_YGrowth&af_sub3=EmailSignature>

On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 11:07 AM, John McCormac
<jmcc at hosterstats.com> wrote:
On 05/12/2019 18:56, Jonathan Zuck wrote:
> How would an "expert" have approached this topic of trust in .ORG?
By showing the good that .ORG and PIR has done. PR 101.

I'm not trying to be a jerk here but living in DC for 30 years, I've
seen LOTS of .ORG sites that were fronts for corporations or other
disingenuous actors. I know Evan is upset about the fact that it's being
written now, in the context of this controversy, but from the
perspective of trust, are folks (are WE?!) right to be trusting of .ORG
domains in their current form?

The intent, from what I have read, with this piece is to do down .ORG
and diminish its credibility by presenting negative examples. It isn't a
question of "trust" but rather the manipulation of the public perception
of .ORG as being just another gTLD.


Regards...jmcc
--
**********************************************************
John McCormac  *  e-mail: jmcc at hosterstats.com<mailto:jmcc at hosterstats.com>
MC2            *  web: http://www.hosterstats.com/
22 Viewmount  *  Domain Registrations Statistics
Waterford      *  Domnomics - the business of domain names
Ireland        *  https://amzn.to/2OPtEIO
IE            *  Skype: hosterstats.com
**********************************************************
_______________________________________________
CPWG mailing list
CPWG at icann.org<mailto:CPWG at icann.org>
https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/cpwg

_______________________________________________
By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman link above to change your membership status or configuration, including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/cpwg/attachments/20191205/b4053dba/attachment-0001.html>