We agree James!
Well ah bless mah soul, Elvis really is still alive and well!
Now that we're agreeing, let's see how you feel about these apples?
I have personally never had a problem separating the altruistic objectives of Membership with the for-profit motivations of Tag Holding but the Membership is allowed to cast their own votes on democratic principles; albeit weighted. Finding a balance between commercial interests (in terms of the Mems & Arts) and community needs is never easy, and I think there is still confusion and suspicion between bigger and smaller members and Nominet over these issues. However, I think it would be disrespectful to simply cast aside the contributions of the bigger members (ISPs) who were part of the Naming Committee that preceded Nominet and without whose help Nominet might not have been created in the first place.
If I remember correctly, the PAB is already scheduled to discuss "ideas for a better, more inclusive Nominet" within its work programme.
That said, it is my opinion that the PAB would like to see more involvement from bigger members and with bigger members and Nominet; but as one particular election candidate said in his rather selective election statement; historically larger domain registrars have simply interacted with Nominet as a supplier but now, as the market "matures" we find that larger members are more interested in participating. He also says the current framework of consulting and debate for members is out dated and ineffective. One is inclined to wonder where has he been whilst the rest of us (even Acorn Domains) were trying to get all members; and more importantly stakeholders; involved - including the big yins - and where has he been whilst the market was already maturing during the past 2 to 3 years and whilst Nominet was rushing up and down the country speaking to hundreds of members and organising public events like the Nominet UK Stakeholder event on the Internet Governance Forum; 9th October; in London? In fact, where has he been whilst most of us were realising it wasn't about members or registrars at all, it was about Stakeholders?
The point is this Beasty, we can all criticise but I believe our criticism should be tempered with the realities of what Nominet is already doing and trying to do to increase stakeholder involvement. Here's a verbatim quote from this candidate's statement: "Whilst we must keep advancing, we must also be mindful of the responsibilities Nominet has to UK registrars whom are driving forward usage of domain names". No mention of stakeholders at all, just Nominet's reponsibilities to UK registrars. Isn't it the registrants (as in stakeholders) who drive forward usage of domain names? Or am I being naive? Anyway, how very dare him come along after having taken no part himself for years and proceed to ignore the wider stakeholder communities. (Did I already ask where has he been?)
I personally believe we could (and should) all work together to the benefit of all stakeholders, and arguments and innuendoes aside, even those among us who do not like the current Nominet may find that working together creates a more solid and coherent foundation for change. I believe we can all contribute to change but not change for the membership only, change for the whole community.
Regards
James Conaghan
Last edited:
