Re: [ga] Re: Board descisions

[DPF <david@farrar.com>]

On Wed, 14 Mar 2001 18:06:23 -0800, you wrote:

>At 01:55 AM 3/14/2001, DPF wrote:
>>But I find it damn scary that some people could even consider that
>>existing registrants in a TLD would not be grand fathered if there is
>>a policy change.
>
>Indeed, the purpose of floating this particular, inventive interpretation 
>is exactly so that people will be scared.

Umm I am unsure if you are accusing me of floating the interpretation
or Verisign of having done so in their letter.  I have made it very
clear that I do not believe the status of *.org is an issue relating
to this contract proposal, but as part of a wider discussion on ICANN
it is certainly relevant.

>Being scared is so much easier than focusing on the facts and actual merits 
>(and actual deficiencies) of the alternative contract.

I can only trust you are not referring to me or you have faulty e-mail
Mr Crocker.  I spent several hours going through the merits of both
contracts and posted a multi-page analysis of them.  Apart from Mr
Gomes who helpfully supplied some missing info no-one has debated the
analysis I did which in some detail listed both the merits and
deficiencies.

My conclusion is that while I like some of the proposed changes the
overall "cost" is too high in reversing the registry/registrar split
policy and granting a presumptive right to *.com.  If it was only one
of these, and not both, I think it would be a far more beneficial
proposal.

DPF
--
david@farrar.com
ICQ 29964527
--
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