RE: [ga] Transfers & WHOIS

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

In all of that rambling, I think that we're saying the same thing. You just
added a peck of confusion spice. No programmer is going to write something
that they're certain won't be used. Arbitrary policies create the sort of
itch that programmers tend to scratch with running code. If you will read
carefully, I thought I was pretty clear that I was talking about policies
that restrict capabilities. Those will be hammered by code. Code that find
good acceptance is the end-users vote against the policies.

|> -----Original Message-----
|> From: Eric Dierker [mailto:eric@hi-tek.com]
|> Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 12:50 PM
|> To: Roeland Meyer
|> Cc: 'Eric@Business.com.VN'; 'Rick H Wesson'; 'Jefsey Morfin';
|> 'ga@dnso.org'
|> Subject: Re: [ga] Transfers & WHOIS
|> 
|> 
|> Roeland and Jefsey,
|> 
|> I just gave these posts to my UCSD computer scientist 
|> roommate and he reflected
|> what his professor, Elkan Chasler told him when inquiring on 
|> the instructions
|> on a web site and systems assignment instructions.
|> Student: "What do you mean by integration and easy communication?"
|> Prof: "don't ask me I am just an ignorant user, your grade 
|> will reflect what I
|> would pay for your product."
|> 
|> This stupid user and my programming friend pounded out into 
|> the wee hours of
|> the morning what I wanted and he got paid an A.
|> 
|> Follow the money not the technology and the money is where 
|> I, as a consumer
|> will spend it.  Roeland you call it a burden those of us in 
|> the people biz call
|> it supply and demand.
|> 
|> Microsoft tries dictating said demand and keeps ending up in 
|> court.  However
|> they also give us what we want and make big dough.
|> 
|> Let me be blunt; don't you code writers dare tell us 
|> consumers what we demand,
|> we will tell you and the smart ones will provide it.  The 
|> same is well said for
|> transfers and Whois, me and ignoramus marketing idiots like 
|> me will determine
|> the public user desire and the folks who supply my demand 
|> will be successful
|> and those of you who would tell us what we need will be 
|> cutting bait as we
|> fish.
|> 
|> Now that said, you tell me you got a better mouse trap - and 
|> by God if you do -
|> I will make the masses want it, even if you are wrong, 
|> because what the heck do
|> the masses know anyhow.
|> 
|> Again bluntly, don't you code writers dare tell consumers 
|> what they can and
|> cannot have!  We will not stand for it and will find a code 
|> writer who will
|> accomplish what we want.
|> 
|> (ya WXW cuss my friend Jim, but if he spends a mil on 
|> advertising you are a
|> Goner) Long live the inclusive roots. And longer live you 
|> coders that make
|> roots absoulete {sp intentional}
|> 
|> Eric
|> 
|> 
|> Roeland Meyer wrote:
|> 
|> > Sorry for the P.S.
|> >
|> > The best example I can think of for this is the Unix vs 
|> Linux event. Unix
|> > was a restricted proprietary operating system. The burden 
|> became so onerous
|> > that it prompted the birth of Linux and the open source community.
|> >
|> > |> -----Original Message-----
|> > |> From: Roeland Meyer
|> > |> Sent: Saturday, December 08, 2001 10:50 AM
|> > |> To: 'Eric@Business.com.VN'; Rick H Wesson
|> > |> Cc: Jefsey Morfin; ga@dnso.org
|> > |> Subject: RE: [ga] Transfers & WHOIS
|> > |>
|> > |>
|> > |> It has been proven, over a period of decades, in many more
|> > |> networks than the present Internet, that running code trumps
|> > |> whatever arbitrary policies that non-coders can come up
|> > |> with, every time. It has to, first and above all, make sense
|> > |> to the programmers or they will not write the code that way.
|> > |> If you actually pay the programmers to implement arbitrary
|> > |> policies then other programmers will write a new version
|> > |> that opens it up to "technical limits-only" and that's the
|> > |> version that becomes the defacto standard.
|> > |>
|> > |> Operating under any other assumption has proven to be
|> > |> delusional in the past, over many instances. Hence, my
|> > |> comments in this area. There are instance-proofs involving
|> > |> MSFT, IBM, HP, SUN, and DEC, among others.
|> > |>
|> > |> Implementing policies that are a sub-set of the technical
|> > |> limits has proven to have limited success in the past and
|> > |> track-record is all that matters. Unless, you like repeating
|> > |> mistakes and adding to the body of evidence stating otherwise.
|> > |>
|> > |> -----Original Message-----
|> > |> From: Eric Dierker [mailto:eric@hi-tek.com]
|> > |> Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 6:53 PM
|> > |> To: Rick H Wesson
|> > |> Cc: Jefsey Morfin; ga@dnso.org
|> > |> Subject: Re: [ga] Transfers & WHOIS
|> > |>
|> > |>
|> > |> It is my understanding that this is a TF within the 
|> DNSO via the NC.
|> > |> Not IETF, ASO or PSO.
|> > |> It is therefor very much about the politics and privacy
|> > |> issues of WHOIS and not so much about the technical aspects.
|> > |>  If I am not mistaken there are many perfectly acceptable
|> > |> technical applications and the questions to be resolved are
|> > |> of a social nature, contractual nature, privacy nature and
|> > |> moral nature.
|> > |> I would be interested to see any reference otherwise.
|> > |> Sincerely,
|> > |>
|> 
--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html