Discuss mailing list

[kevin <krattai AT gmail.com>]

Why openNIC?

https://web.archive.org/web/20080217222644/http://www.opennicproject.or
g:80/en/overview.html


On Wed, 2018-07-25 at 20:01 -0500, Jonah Aragon wrote:
> Yes. In my opinion, OpenNIC’s purpose was to be a user-controlled
> alternative to ICANN. The problem with ICANN wasn’t the rules they
> implemented necessarily, but the opaque decision-making process
> behind them, and their clear money grabbing practices. Not to mention
> their status as a monopoly on the domain name system.
> 
> Developing an actual organizational structure is our path to becoming
> a serious alternative to ICANN (as a related reminder, we did already
> vote to form a 501(c)(3) organization, although that hasn’t
> materialized as of yet). I know a lot of people here seem to be
> content with the status quo, but it’s time to get back to our
> original purpose of building a serious competitor.
> 
> Our current setup can be achieved by anybody with a computer and 5
> minutes to install BIND9. If OpenNIC is an organization in name only,
> if we aren’t willing to enact policies that will help us form a
> united cause against ICANN, why does OpenNIC need to exist at all? 
> 
> Jonah
> 
> > 
> > On Jul 25, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Daniel Quintiliani <danq AT runbox.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > I've only been involved in OpenNIC since Prism-Break (2013
> > according to the mailing list archives), but to my knowledge
> > OpenNIC was created to allow democratic, non-secret decision making
> > as opposed to ICANN, right?
> > 
> > --
> > 
> > -Dan Q
> > 
> > On Sun, 22 Jul 2018 11:36:57 -0500, kevin <krattai AT gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > 
> > > I've just been thinking about a problem with another community
> > > I'm
> > > involved in and while working through possible solutions, I
> > > remembered
> > > that corporate strategies yields corporate results.
> > > 
> > > As an original group of volunteerists, it's odd to look at the
> > > way
> > > openNIC has progressed in some areas, especially for a group that
> > > I
> > > believe wanted to get away from the bureaucracy that resulted in
> > > ICANN.
> > > 
> > > I'm not opposed to voting for things as a way to maintain focus
> > > on
> > > certain activities that will move a community forward, but when a
> > > vote
> > > is about developing a bureaucratic and corporate structure, it
> > > really
> > > doesn't make sense for a group of decentralized
> > > volunteerists.  In
> > > fact, it can be highly detrimental to such a group activity.  A
> > > lot of
> > > some of the more current "decisions" the group has voted on and
> > > the
> > > direction of much of our documentation, especially as "rules"
> > > rather
> > > than "guidelines", I wonder what the end result of openNIC might
> > > be, in
> > > relation to ICANN.
> > > 
> > > Anyhow, I just wanted to put that out there and find if maybe
> > > there's
> > > others active in the group who are thinking like I am, or if I'm
> > > really
> > > just an outlier in the community.
> > > 
> > > Kevin
> > 
> > --------
> > You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> > You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicpr
> > oject.org
> 
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
> You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproj
> ect.org