Re: [ga] The Expiration and Re-Distribution of Domain Names
Title: Help Fair comments in a way, Andrew!
I'd have to back those registrars who are simply honest, hard-working
people trying to run their businesses fair and square. I've encountered very
decent people in this category, and they just get a bad press because of the
bandits.
Personally, I'd probably prefer a centralised model which bypasses
registrars altogether, as expressed in my original post, but I'm not sure it
would be accepted or so effective - I just don't know.
But tell me, Andrew: what model do you propose? I simply argue that my
proposals would be fairer than what exists at present (which is a
travesty).
The fact is: that expiring domain names are not fairly accessible to the
internet public, and they should be.
If my proposals happened to make any money for registrars, then so be it.
But that's not as important as developing a system which takes expiring names
away from SnapNames/Verisign etc etc and makes them directly available to the
Internet public.
As such - and until such time as someone comes up with a fairer proposal -
I invite comments and consideration to be offered about this model.
Richard Henderson
From Andrew P. Gardner:
>If registrars can't stay afloat now that the gold rush is over, the
_last_
>thing we should be doing is pumping more money their way. That won't help >them become more efficient, just supply more coke for the noses at the top >level. > >They're not British Leyland, and we're not the British Government. > >Try coming up with something more financially viable. > > >Andrew P. Gardner |