Re: [ga] WLS

["John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D." <john@johnberryhill.com>]

From: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>

> I agree with Kent on this.   There is a difference between end users and
> speculators, and it is far more important to protect end users than
> speculators in domain names.

I agree with Kent as well.  The difference between a "consumer" and a
"speculator" is a state of mind.  There is no disagreement there.

But the question was how WLS pricing was going to distinguish between the
mental states of these groups in order to make it more expensive for one
group while less expensive for the other group.  That was why I asked Chuck
what meaningful distinction there was to have disparate economic consequences
depending on the mental state of the participant.  Chuck made the assertion
there woud be such a disparate impact, and that is a fascinating conclusion
which flies in the face what the evil "professionals" are paying, as
documented in SnapNames' own report.

Maybe there is a way of doing that, but, gee, I can't wait to read that
SnapNames patent to figure out how they are going to engage in mind reading.

Let's do some more math based on documented facts, instead of the unsupported
hypothesis that Mr. Gomes has put forth.  According to the SnapNames report,
people pay as much as $2500 per month simply to be a member of a group which
shares registrar access to the registry.  This payment does not secure those
people a *single* domain name, it is simply the price of admission to the
club.

Now along comes someone who says that WLS will increase the cost of doing
business for these people.  I have to scratch my head and wonder how paying
$2500 for a certain prospect of obtaining 71 domain names at a rate of $35 is
going to make these club members worse off than paying $2500 for nothing, as
they are doing now, by SnapNames own document.

The SnapNames report deplores the fact that these miscreants happen to have a
lot of money.  Okay, so along comes WLS which makes it a fixed-price
proposition.  Who will do better, Jamie, someone with a lot of money or
someone without a lot of money.  Oddly enough, people with a lot of money
will do better.  Big surprise there.

People pay more money than that to be in a club to play golf, exclusive of
greens fees.  Que lastima!  Let's have a Senate hearing about how people are
being denied access to golf courses because they don't have enough money to
join.  Somebody call the "free market" police!

And if you are happy with a system, which by SnapNames own admission, will
come into being front-loaded with more than 50% of the slots grandfathered in
by speculators, that's fine.  And that is precisely what IOD tried to do with
.web, and was a prime reason why they were shot down in flames.  But let's
stop pretending that SnapNames is primarily working for the "consumer",
because they simply are not.  SnapNames will not disclose all of its
customers and how many domain names it has obtained for each, but they sneer
at the registrars who have decided not to partner with SnapNames for the very
same thing lack of candor.  The only time SnapNames published their "Hot 100"
list, they took it down after it was analyzed here.

Bottom line on "competition" - SnapNames is not competing as well as they
would like to, so they need a leg-up.

And, throughout the SnapNames document, they keep referring to their own
system as providing fair and equal treatment to all comers.  Why doesn't
someone go ask Cameron Powell to state, under oath, that all snapback
customers paid the same price?  Or are "unadvertised special deals" something
they only want to mention when they are talking about OTHER people.  Maybe
they do, maybe they don't.  But let's hear Mr. Powell deny it.  I'll make the
popcorn, while some kind soul forwards this invitation to him.

If he can't deny it, then that stuff in their report about "fair first-come
first-serve treatment of all customers" is nothing other than a plain
unvarnished lie.  Are you out there, Mr. Powell?

If he won't answer the question here, then let's have Mr. Sims or a board
member ask him in Bucharest.

And you think the leopard is going to change its spots, right?

Again, I don't care whether WLS is approved or not.  But the hypocrisy alone
is a reason to wonder what these folks are really all about.



--
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