RE: [ga] FW: Comments Received Regarding Revised WLS Proposal
the comments that were sent to the firstname.lastname@example.org address after VGRS'
responses to the questions were posted.
only assume you did not read the entire document. There was no filtering
of comments. Please note that the GA comments (Abel's comments) were included;
in my opinion they were very negative; they were included in spite of the fact
that no evidence of representativeness was provided.
Registrar's Constituency's Formal response to the WLS is missing.
convenient, for it does NOT support the WLS.
Also very convenient is
the absence of the the expanded discussion over whether the registry was
contractually allowed to roll out and charge for this type of service.
not see this type of service listed in the Registry contract's appendix of
"allowed" services that the registry could charge for. Neither did
Chuck, if you are going to publish only the feedback that
is favorable to WLS, make it clear that that is what you are doing. As
usual, this is a blatantly biased posting by
At 02:09 AM 3/15/2002 -0500, Gomes, Chuck
From: Johnson, Terry
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 7:29 PM
'email@example.com'; 'firstname.lastname@example.org'; 'email@example.com';
Cc: 'Stahura@enom.com'; Gomes, Chuck;
Subject: Comments Received Regarding
Revised WLS Proposal
On behalf of Chuck Gomes, thanks once again for
taking time to share your comments and feedback concerning the proposed Wait
Listing Service (WLS). As stated, it has been our goal to
aggregate the feedback that is collected and post this for public record to
the VeriSign website. To that end, we have posted to our website the
collective feedback that was submitted to VGRS, and received at firstname.lastname@example.org as of 4:30P, March 14,
2002. The URL where these comments regarding the revised Wait Listing
Proposal may be viewed is at: http://www.verisign-grs.com/wls.html.
(under the title: "Comments on Wait List Service