Re: [ga] SnapNames is now whining to total strangers!

[eric@hi-tek.com]

Give us some data to back up these statements.  I believe there are more ccTLD
names in "use" than there are dotCOMs.  Now if you are talking warehousing and/or
hoarding you may be right.
But this appears to be a dead horse and whipping it will not make it run.
We do not need more generics we need more commercially viable/country beneficial
ccTLDs, and that is happening.  You in ICANN have missed the curve, Joe, Jim and
Leah have already beaten you to the generic competition so move on and manage.

I assume you are speaking in some sort of official Icann position - security???

Eric

Kent Crispin wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 04:29:18PM +0200, Marc Schneiders wrote:
> > On Mon, 17 Jun 2002, at 12:59 [=GMT+0100], Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond wrote:
> > > I personally find this to be disgusting. Domain name speculation is
> > > on-par with cowboy practices. Those endulging in it should be ashamed
> > > of themselves, because it does nothing for the Internet; the only
> > > incentive here, is fast cash, or a par with ticket touts. Trouble is,
> > > ticket touts are illegal, and the Internet is not mature enough to shame
> > > domain touting, because most actors out there today, are knee-deep
> > > in it.
> >
> > This is a silly analysis. If it is an analysis. Domain names are not any
> > different from other scarce goods. The solution is relieving the scarcity.
>
> On the contrary.  Domain names are, in fact, different from many other
> goods.
>
> > Impossible with tickets, not with domain names. Solve the problem at the
> > root.
>
> The problem is *not* the shortage of names at the root.  The problem is
> a shortage of names in .com...  All evidence indicates that for a
> substantial majority of the registrant population, .com names are much
> more desirable than other names.  If people lost that mindset, then
> there are 250 TLDs available, and they can soak up a lot of demand.
> But as long as that mindset persists, then there is a shortage, and
> adding new names to the root simply won't make any difference.
>
> The only interesting question is whether adding new names might help to
> reduce the mindset; evidence from the new gTLDs indicate that it is
> very tough going.
>
> > > One last point: domain names are not owned by registries/registrars.
> > > They are merely the maintainers of the database. Too many of them
> > > seem to think otherwise.
> >
> > Who does own them?
>
> Domain names are not owned by anybody.
>
> --
> Kent Crispin                               "Be good, and you will be
> kent@songbird.com                          lonesome."  -- Mark Twain
>
> --
> 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

--
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