[nc-transfer] Re: [ga] [ncdnhc-discuss] Re: WLS proposal
To be clear, Jamie Love re-proposed the auction model. I was putting forward
the new concept of the "cooling tank".
----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Brown" <email@example.com>
To: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "Ross Wm. Rader" <email@example.com>
Cc: "James Love" <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "John Berryhill"
<email@example.com>; <firstname.lastname@example.org>; "Transfer TF (E-mail)"
Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 9:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ga] [ncdnhc-discuss] Re: WLS proposal
> I don't see anything wrong with the concept explained by Ross, below.
> It gives the original registrant much more time to realize they have
> an expired domain name and it removes the conflict of interest
> potential for the Registrar and Registry, during a much short time
> Furthermore, NetSol/VeriSign shouldn't have a problem with this
> extended period, either, since they have, in fact, been hoarding
> expired names for a considerably longer period of time. Although, my
> bet is that they will use it as an excuse to ask for a price increase.
> I could be psychic - time will tell.
> Tuesday, June 18, 2002, 4:37:08 AM, Ross Wm. Rader <email@example.com>
> >> Specifically, I proposed a 30 day period during which people
> >> could register for a lottery for the expired domain, and that during
> RWR> 30
> >> day period, at any time, the original domain holder could get it back.
> >> Anyone who wanted the expired domain could contact the original domain
> RWR> name
> >> holder, and suggest they get the domain back and sell it to them. So
> RWR> any
> >> auction develops, it will be with the original domain holder, not the
> >> registrar. The original domain name holder benefits the most from
> >> system. They are more likely to catch mistakes, or could sell the
> RWR> to
> >> an interested party.
> RWR> We talked about something similar on the last call.
> RWR> Realizing that a lot of the speculative value of a domain lies with
> RWR> goodwill that accrues to it because of the initial registrant, it was
> RWR> proposed that all domain names slated for deletion are put into a
> RWR> tank for x days beyond the 30 days described in the Redemption Grace
> RWR> proposal.
> RWR> This would create a situation whereby registrants would be guaranteed
> RWR> right of re-registration "if they forgot to renew" and eliminate or
> RWR> trainspotting by ensuring a prolonged 404-like condition over a
> RWR> extended period of time before the name was deleted. Once cooled, the
> RWR> could be deleted and re-registered by anyone on a first-come, first
> RWR> basis (and get a name relatively free of baggage).
> RWR> In my mind, this proposal has much to commend it in its simplicity
> RWR> perceived effectiveness.
> RWR> -rwr
> RWR> --
> RWR> This message was passed to you via the firstname.lastname@example.org list.
> RWR> Send mail to email@example.com to unsubscribe
> RWR> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> RWR> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA Internet Concepts, Inc.
> firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.inetconcepts.net
> PGP Key ID: 04C99A55 (972) 788-2364 Fax: (972) 788-5049
> Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate