RE: [ga] WLS Suggestion

["Abel Wisman" <abel@able-towers.com>]

Ok ok I finally post and find out I am late as usual, nonetheless I
would like to thank you for reconsidering.

And besides that, George, well done as usual :)

Abel


> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga-full@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-full@dnso.org] 
> On Behalf Of Abel Wisman
> Sent: 23 August 2002 09:23
> To: 'Karl Auerbach'; 'Kristy McKee'
> Cc: ga@dnso.org
> Subject: RE: [ga] WLS Suggestion
> 
> 
> It has been long enough that I've been silent, this letter 
> frightens me
> Mr Auerbach, to say the least.
> 
> It seems in your busy schedule you have not had enough time 
> to read the
> opinions and expert knowledge that has been shown on this list for one
> by a lot of people, most of whom supported you.
> 
> I suggest you read back on the topic, it can not be that 
> hard, a lot is
> gathered on sites, and you will without any doubt come to the 
> conclusion
> that whatever read herrings you are reading now, they do not nearly
> describe the can of worms you are opening by supporting this proposal.
> 
> I urge you to reconsider supporting the proposal.
> 
> 
> Kind regards
> 
> Abel Wisman
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-ga-full@dnso.org [mailto:owner-ga-full@dnso.org] 
> > On Behalf Of Karl Auerbach
> > Sent: 23 August 2002 00:01
> > To: Kristy McKee
> > Cc: ga@dnso.org
> > Subject: Re: [ga] WLS Suggestion
> > 
> > 
> > On Thu, 22 Aug 2002, Kristy McKee wrote:
> > 
> > > If this WLS process must be implemented, why not offer the 
> > Domain Name 
> > > Registrant the "opportunity" to pay more money per year to 
> > ensure that they 
> > > also have claim to their domain(s) within the WLS database.
> > 
> > Presumably under WLS they have that - they simply buy into WLS.
> > 
> > I have a question for you (and everyone on the GA list):
> > 
> > I've been wrestling back and forth on the WLS issue.  I don't 
> > like giving
> > NSI/Verisign yet another boon but I also don't like ICANN being a
> > regulator of ever increasing size.
> > 
> > This is a tough question and there are equities on all sides.
> > 
> > My feeling is that I at the board meeting tomorrow morning 
> that I will
> > vote in favor of WLS but only on the condition that there are 
> > provisions
> > that require the current registrant to know of the existance (and
> > identity) of WLS entries placed on his/here domain name.  
> That, to my
> > mind, helps restore the balance of information and lets all 
> > parties to the
> > registration agreement attempt to optimize their actions.
> > 
> > (It may not be black letter contract law, but I do feel that 
> > those who are
> > parties to a contract ought not to be unreasonably 
> manipulative of one
> > another - particularly when the contracts are of an adhesive 
> > quality [and
> > more particularly when the public isn't allowed onto the 
> > regulatory body
> > that establishes many of the contractual terms].  And in the 
> > case of WLS I
> > have always found it distasteful that the registry, who has 
> > an indirect
> > contractual relationship with the registrant, might hold back 
> > information
> > from the registrant that could be of value to the registrant.)
> > 
> > This condition on the casting of my vote in favor is in 
> > addition to things
> > like the pre-existance of the grace period mechanisms for at least 6
> > months, etc etc.)
> > 
> > Any comments?
> > 
> > 		--karl--
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > 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
> 


--
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