|
IMO, in it's initial decision to allow .xxx, ICANN might have possibly relied upon flawed/incorrect/biased info submitted to them by the proposing agency, namely concerning the REAL-and-Correct-and-Verifiable number of actual .xxx pre-registrations along with proof that the pre-registrations were actually REAL stake-holders in the Adult Entertainment Industry; ICANN, assumedly, relied on that possibly flawed proposal when they ruled on the .xxx INITIAL proposal/request.
IMO, the subsequent Lisbon disapproval of the proposal allowed some of the egg (i.e., ICANN not doing a 100% verification of alleged stake-holder "support") to be washed off of ICANN's face.
Now is the time for ICANN to decide to go back to step one, namely the initial proposal, and insist on actual and objective proof to back up their contention of Adult Industry stake-holder support for .xxx.
Perhaps this will give ICANN an "out" to get this matter thoroughly re-looked-at before any more voting on the present proposal??????
Comments anyone????
|