Discuss mailing list

[Mauricio Pasquier Juan <mauricio AT pasquierjuan.com.ar>]

On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 07:25:46PM +0100, Simon wrote:
> 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.

Absolutely! I've seen far too many organizations dissapear because of this

> 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?

Community is not centralization.. down with the lone rangers! \o/

--

Attachment: pgpLNyRSgQYvm.pgp
Description: PGP signature