RE: [ga] The "mushroom treatment"....

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

|> From: Jefsey Morfin [mailto:jefsey@wanadoo.fr]
|> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 4:30 AM
|> 
|> Dear Jim,
|> I certainly appreciate your mail. But please be fair with 
|> Lynn (I enough 
|> dispute him to be able to say that!). He also says:
|> 
|> <quote>
|> Q: Would you consider usefulness of new TLDs before adding them?
|> A: If there is no demanding, pressing consumer need that's 
|> perceived, then 
|> why risk destabilization in other areas?
|> </quote>

That's been one of the core arguments for suppressing the creation of new
TLDs, since four years ago. He plagerizes D'Crock almost word for word.

The truth is, as ANY marketer can tell you, you can never be specific for a
consumer need. That said, the need for new TLDs was proven years ago. Which
specific consumer need, is impossible to forecast. That has also been
proven. There's a certain requirement for trial and error here. However, the
need, for new TLDs, appears to be so high that it almost doesn't matter.
However, a TLD with a specific charter will probably get more attention, due
to its focused market, than a generic TLD. But, that is also a supposition.

Also, ANY change is destabilizing, according to Webster. The COM TLD
receives thousands of changes per day with no problem. The dot-com blowout
removed thousands of COM entities catastrophically, with no problems (some
web sites are no longer there). We've even had hundreds of thousands of
business loose their internet connectivity (North Point), and the Internet
didn't collapse.

Lynn is either too stupid to recognize FUD when he sees it (in which case, I
question is competency), or he is a part of the FUD machine (in which case,
I am disinclined to grant you suspension in my belief wrt his honesty).
--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html