Discuss mailing list

[Simon <simon AT hacknix.net>]

On 04/29/14 19:05, Quinn Wood wrote:
>  I think regaining stability is far more important than avoiding stepping 
> on people's toes.

I agree. However. That's not exactly what I meant though.

No, OpenNIC is not in desperate need of operators, though it does need
fresh interest to help to keep the project going when others inevitably
leave. If people who are keen to help out are told no, eventually they
will get fed up and leave too. OpenNIC needs a community, it needs an
influx of interested people who believe in the cause, or else OpenNIC
will become a private project, a club with no fresh people and fresh
ideas ever coming in. If this is the case, gradually it will stagnate.
If OpenNIC seeks widespread acceptance, the community needs to grow and
that means taking the risk of new admins, new TLDs and new ideas.

However, what I was getting at is that an operator who is set on doing
everything themselves in their own way and will plough ahead on their
own and not take suggestions, help or support from the community as a
whole, who will just do their own thing, is far more likely to result in
orphaned TLDs and downtime than if the decision making and
administrative load is spread more evenly. If you look at the recently
failed or orphaned TLDs, there seems to be a pattern of a single person
being mainly responsible for the TLD.  When some event, whether it be
life events, changes in personal interests or disagreement with the
direction of the OpenNIC occurs, the TLD to fall by the wayside. Would
it not be better to have the servers that comprise the T-1 for a TLD be
run by a group of operators, so that if one loses interest or
experiences changes in their life, the TLD survives?  If not this, then
at least an agreed process for adoption of a TLD if an operator needs to
leave for whatever reason?

Simon