DNSO Mailling lists archives


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Registrars Bill of Rights

As usual, Danny clouds the real issues with a bunch of worthless

Monday, Monday, April 08, 2002, 8:23:37 AM, DannyYounger@cs.com wrote:

> William, whose highly constructive commentary is regularly to be found in 
> "substantive" one-line retorts, states:

> << And as always, Danny has the right to be unconstructive and contribute
>  nothing of substance to the discussion. >>

> At issue is the fact that the DNSO has done little to nothing to establish 
> consensus-based policies to curb what many view as abuses on the part of 
> registrars and resellers.  It is within our rights to call for the 
> establishment of policies to govern hoarding, warehousing, speculation, 
> domain name expirations, etc.  

But that is not what is happening here, what is happening instead is
an individual is DEMANDING action that is simply not supported by the
contractual obligations.

If you seek a policy change, then DOCUMENT the change, and seek
support for it.

> As a reseller, William, of course, seeks not to have any limitations placed 
> upon his community.

Why don't you not try and guess at what I seek, and let me speak for
myself, Danny boy.

What I was pointing out was that if the individual who has been
flooding with complaints and demands for immediate action thinks that
the situation needs to be changed, demanding that they do it his way
is not the way to do it.  If you seek a change in policy, you document
what changes you want to see, and you seek support for it.

Instead what happened was he was demanding they do it his way, and
frankly, I wouldn't blame the whole lot of his CC list if they just
ignored him.

> Perhaps Mr. Walsh considers it wholly appropriate for registrars not to be
> forced to operate a public service.  Perhaps he truly believes that totally 
> self-serving practices at the expense of the general public are warranted.  I 
> don't.

I believe that it would be wrong of ICANN to force business models
onto registrars, and I believe such a restriction would be unlawful
anyway.  The fact is that the majority of registrars will serve the
public, as that is where the money is, but there IS nothing wrong,
ethically, morally, and in this case, legally, with Registrars
existing who do not sell to the general public.

As a business owner, WHO I DO BUSINESS WITH is ENTIRELY up to me, to
obligate me to do otherwise would not only be wrong, but probably
unlawful and thus unenforceable.  I regularly choose not to do
business with some people.   That is my right, and it is my right to
decide how and to whom I will market my services.

Best regards,
William X Walsh <william@wxsoft.info>
Save Internet Radio!  
CARP will kill Webcasting!

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

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>