SIGNAL POSTED BY carl | 07.29.02 @ 07:27 AM Re: IMS/ISC endorsements  [ FILED UNDER: Answers » ]

> Date: Sun, 28 Jul 2002 20:14:06 -0400
> From: Milton Mueller <mueller@syr.edu>
> To: <carl@media.org>
> Subject: IMS/ISC endorsements
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> Content-Disposition: inline
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Hi Milton -

> I am a member of the Noncommercial constituency team that
> ICANN has asked to evaluate sections 4, 5, and 6 of the
> .org applications.
>

We know who you are. :)) (Good book on the DNS, btw).

> Right now I am working (along with two others) on assessment
> of the public support statements. We have a short period of time to
> make sense of these. Given the large number of individual
> messages of support for your bid (and certain other bids)
> I hope you can help us by sorting yours in the following way:
>
> 1. Organizational vs. individual

We specifically asked for individual support not institutional support. Many of our statements of support are in the form of "I'm responsible for foo.org and I support ...". But, the only thing we're counting is individuals. (I should note that we didn't provide a form letter so all of our comments are the original words of the individual.)

Our support come in three forms:

1. As of 7/29/02, 217 web sites have "spread the dot" by putting our blue dot on their web pages.
   You can find those web sites on our summary page: http://not.invisible.net/dot/spread/
2. As of 7/29/02, 414 individuals have voiced their support.
   You can read 50 comments/page here: http://not.invisible.net/dot/comments/
   
   
3. Quite a few people have been speaking out on their web sites or on forums like Metafilter and Slashdot.
   You can find links to these external sites here: http://not.invisible.net/signals/memes/org.shtml

> 2. .org name holders vs. non .org name holders.

That's a really tough one to answer. For example, several people listed a .com or .net address, but also wrote that they were responsible for administering several .org domains.

Of the 559 unique addresses, a quick scan of the file shows 250 .com, 162 .org, and 63 .net with the rest spread out among the ccTLDs.

Our take on those numbers is that we're tracking the overall Internet with a significantly disproportionatly higher ratio of .org registrants.

> 3. Country of origin.
>

We didn't ask that information. In skimming the comments and web sites, however, I see very strong pockets of support from France, Japan, Romania, and the U.S. with a good sprinkling from throughout the rest of the world.

Equally important to country of origin is "community of origin." If you look at our comments, you will see very strong support from web designers throughout the world, from people who maintain infrastructure (e.g., ISPs), from software developers, and from holders of .org domain names.

Finally, I'd like to point out that quite a few people responsible for large pieces of Internet infrastructure have voice their support. For example, Eric Allman (sendmail), Marshall Kirk McKusick (head of Usenix and a lead Unix developer), Tim O'Reilly, Howard, Rheingold, and many others have all shown their support.

Please let me know if I can provide further analysis. And, please remember that we're getting new supporters every day so please check back with me just before you finish your analysis for updated numbers.

Regards,

Carl

Comments

	Response to NC Constituency	08.06.02 @ 03.49 PM	bot