RE: [ga] WLS

[Mason Cole <MasonC@Snapnames.com>]

Here's a brief set of corrections to be sure everyone has the dispassionate
facts:

The distinction is not speculators versus "normal" consumers; as many have
correctly pointed out, this distinction doesn't get you very far. Rather,
the problem we're addressing is service of a *few* customers -- whoever they
may be -- and exclusion of the majority of customers. Speculators are among
our best customers; we have no desire to see them disadvantaged. What we do
want to see is the system being more transparent to unsophisticated users,
one in which evidence of use by *all types* of customers is readily
available. 

There is no evidence that any non-speculator customer -- IP owner,
corporation, etc. -- uses any of the "competing" services referred to.
Whether they are capable of being found or not (mostly not, and when found,
confusing and sometimes very expensive), there is no question that consumers
are simply not finding them. There is no evidence to the contrary, though it
has been requested for months.

Although our pricing, like much of the debate taking place over WLS, is not
legally relevant to the ICANN Board's review of VeriSign's proposed WLS
price, we apply the same pricing rules to all SnapBack customers on an equal
basis. We do and have always offered volume discounts, as any business does.
Because this is standard business practice, and is in fact followed by all
registrars, it's unclear why it is relevant here, even under the still
legally unsupported standards of relevance held by WLS critics. So yes, we
do offer "fair first-come first-serve treatment of all customers."

If the other implication is that we provide greater resources to certain
customers than to others, regardless of price, that would be an incorrect
implication. We provide exactly the same resources and service to each
customer, regardless of the volume of the customer or the value of their
desired name.



-----Original Message-----
From: John Berryhill Ph.D. J.D. [mailto:john@johnberryhill.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2002 1:43 PM
To: Paul Stahura; James Love; jfield@aaaq.com
Cc: ga@dnso.org; Kent Crispin; Joe Sims
Subject: Re: [ga] WLS


>>According to the SnapNames
>> report,
>>people pay as much as $2500 per month

> If this report refers to eNom's "Club Drop", the fee is now zero, not 
> $2500 and has been for some time.

While I understand that Paul, SnapNames says you are charging $2500, have
ten members, and are full.  Comrade Powell speak Pravda.  Bourgeousie
counter-revolutionary running dog lackeys have ulterior motives if they
disagree.

You should read the SnapNames report.  The comments made about "anyone who
says differ'nt" is the most classic and explicit example of the debating
tactic of "poisoning the well" I have ever seen.  You only disagree because
you are agent of counter revolution.

Read Part II here:

http://www.snapnames.com/wls.html

You see Paul, your service does not exist or can't be found (according to
Mr. Gomes), or it costs $2500 and serves ten people (according to
SnapNames). Not only that, but your customers smell bad and have impure
thoughts.  That is why you refuse to name your customers publically.

After revolution, Tovarisch, domain name go to proletariat Ivan according to
need and standing in line.  And price will go up for customers with impure
thoughts.  Price will go down for people who think good things.  (according
to Mr. Gomes as augmented by Mr. Crispin's definition)  The domain name
system is intended to provide domain names to people who are good.  Money is
a bad corrupting influence, and the advantages of having money need to be
minimized.

So, please, don't try to fool us about your non-existent and expenseive
service.  We can all read the report at SnapNames.


--
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
--
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