Fw: Re[2]: (Fwd) Re: [ga-roots] alternate roots considered harmful

["NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>
To: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 3:41 AM
Subject: Re: Re[2]: (Fwd) Re: [ga-roots] alternate roots considered harmful


>
> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "William X. Walsh" <william@userfriendly.com>
> To: "NameCritic" <watch-dog@inreach.com>
> Cc: <ga-roots@dnso.org>
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2001 3:01 AM
> Subject: Re[2]: (Fwd) Re: [ga-roots] alternate roots considered harmful
>
>
> > Hello NameCritic,
> >
> > Friday, May 25, 2001, 2:34:58 AM, NameCritic wrote:
> > >> That is no standard at all, and as a result, those claims will not,
> > >> and in fact should not, be taken seriously or given any credibility
> > >> whatsoever.
> >
> > > Then that makes a lot of things invalid becaus to get a TLD or domain
> name
> > > in the beginning all you had to do was ask Jon Postel. Does this mean
> that
> > > .com, .net, .org, .mil , .edu, and , .gov are invalid since that was
how
> > > they were created?
> >
> > You obviously do not know your domain history very well.
>
> Or you do not William. Are you saying there was never a time when all you
> had to do was ask Jon Postel for a domain name to get one?
>
> >
> > >>
> > >> And no, Simon, filing a registration document with IANA years ago
does
> > >> not satisfy a reasonable standard either.
> >
> > > Why not? They were the authority then. The same as ICANN is supposed
to
> be
> > > now. To invalidate those agreements is to make all ICANN agreements
only
> >
> > First of all, that they were "Agreements" is something that only those
> > who "applied" believes.  Secondly,  Postel did not have the authority
> > to enter into those agreements.
>
> Agreements happen between two parties or entities. An application is not
an
> agreement. If the application is approved it is. If they were approved
then
> by IANA then it was an agreement.  As in Dot Web. One might think the fact
> IANA took a thousand dollars up front might indicate some sort of
AGREEMENT
> may have occurred.
>
> And why didn't he have the Authority? Who did William? You set yourself up
> as knowing domain history better than me so I will ask you to explain
> yourself and point me where I can uncover this great klnowledge you seem
to
> already have.
>
> I always am willing to learn something new. Show me where I can find this
> information that is contrary to what I Posteled, oops I mean Posted.
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > William X Walsh
> > mailto:william@userfriendly.com
> > Owner, Userfriendly.com
> > Userfriendly.com Domains
> > The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> >
> >
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html