Re: [ga] charging for renewals after expiry
Monday, February 04, 2002, 9:47:05 PM, admin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>The consumer, in my experience, has a "very, very long memory" and I
>>don't think that it is in the best interest of any player in this
>>market, to deposit a "bad taste" in their mouth. Moreover, I submit
>>that we'll lose the additional surcharge, or penalty, in the round off
>>errors, but the consumer takes those round-off errors to the bank!
a> I am getting tired this argument as an excuse for not resolving these
a> issues. ICANN uses it for doing nothing ... VeriSign uses it ... and
a> now everybody is getting used to using it. The issue is companies
a> locking domains after the expiratory. By then it is too late for the
a> registrant to do research on the different registrars. In the case of
a> VeriSign locking people trying to leave most users registered during the
a> monopoly period so ignoring the issue to depend on "market forces"
a> doesn't solve the immediate problem.
a> Russ Smith
What's the beef? My statements were on the side of the consumer.
Has this eaten you up, to the extend that you can't recognize friend
foe? If so, you need a walk in the park. A bunch of ice cubes with
which to chill and bunches of drinks . . .
It would be good if you drank this subject matter, objective. :-)
Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
This message was passed to you via the email@example.com list.
Send mail to firstname.lastname@example.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html