[ga] Re: [ncdnhc-discuss] About Marketing Practices in .ORG

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Dave and all,

Dave Crocker wrote:

> At 10:05 PM 12/27/2001 -0500, Milton Mueller wrote:
> >On Wed, Dec 26, 2001 at 09:28:58PM -0800, Dave Crocker wrote:
> > > WHAT IS THE NEED FOR MARKETING?
> >
> >.ORG has never been marketed. COM has been marketed.
>
> Since when did .org have the task of competing with .com?

  Any other TLD serves the possibility to be competitive with .Com
just by the nature of being a different name space.  Hence Milton is
at least partly correct in this assertion.  It is true, or at least likely
however that .ORG would not be, and has not been extremely
competitive to .COM except recently.

>
>
> That is, after all,the argument you are making:  .com has marketed, so .org
> must also be marketed.  However, I hope folks note that that is not, in
> fact, an argument that provides any real explanation.

  Not MUST be marketed, but SHOULD be marketed I believe is
Milton's argument.  Such spin as you Dave are providing here is
hardly helpful to getting to the crux of the different positions.

>
>
> Why should actions for .com dictate actions for .org?

  It could be, and has thus far been, that as Milton contends that
some commercial registrants in .COM wish to protect their Domain
Name presence in .COM and/or any other TLD Name space, such as
.ORG by registering any and all similar Domain Names in the .ORG
name space.  Hence it is logical to assume that such will continue to
be of concern after divestiture of .ORG to a new Registry.

>
>
> Again, Milton, what is the NEED to market .org?  What benefit accrues to
> USERS of .org, other than higher costs?

  More well known presence is one such benefit of marketing .ORG.
There are of course a host of others...  The potential increase in cost
may be worth it for some registrants, and not for others.

>
>
> Or, perhaps, you are instead focusing on benefits for the .org REGISTRY,
> since the marketing would produce higher sales?

  Yes if the marketing is done adequately, higher sales would be one
possible benefit to the future Registry as well as Registrars.  This is
a good thing IMHO as it makes for healthy competition.

>
>
> >ORG has been treated as something a business
> >might want to register to protect the exclusivity of
> >their COM name.
>
> oh, well.  now THAT is certainly a wonderful reason to market .org:  make
> it an echo of .com.  THAT would serves the interests of non-commercial
> organizations really well, wouldn't it, Milton?

  I cannot answer for Milton on this one as to his complete thoughts on this
part of the issue, however it indeed MIGHT in a number of instances of
different commercial and their non-commercial affiliates to do so.

>
>
> (And, by the way, you have so far racked up a score of at least two
> arguments vastly more silly than the one from Kent you criticized.  Thanks
> for the effort!)

  I am sorry to see that you continue to practice your feud with Milton,
Dave...  Not very productive and does not aid in arriving at a .ORG
policy.

>
>
> d/
>
> ----------
> Dave Crocker  <mailto:dcrocker@brandenburg.com>
> Brandenburg InternetWorking  <http://www.brandenburg.com>
> tel +1.408.246.8253;  fax +1.408.273.6464
>
> _______________________________________________
> Discuss mailing list
> Discuss@icann-ncc.org
> http://www.icann-ncc.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
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