RE: [ga] eresolution realizes fairness doesn't pay under udrp

[Roeland Meyer <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

|> From: Kent Crispin [mailto:kent@songbird.com]
|> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 5:35 PM

|> On Wed, Dec 05, 2001 at 08:02:54PM -0500, L Gallegos wrote:
|> > 
|> > On 5 Dec 2001, at 15:44, Kent Crispin wrote:
|> > 
|> > > 
|> > > The fact that the other two providers had almost 
|> > > identical conviction rates is actually an 
|> > > indication that they were following more objective
|> > > criteria than eResolution. 
|> > 
|> > Or that both are equally biased toward the Plaintiff.  Sheesh.

|> Of *course* they are biased towards the plaintiff. 
|> That is an obvious, expected, and desired result of the design of 
|> the system 

|> But the statistics are simply not evidence for either unfairness or bias.


Aside from all the bogus analysis I have been reading wrt UDRP. I offer Mark
Twain's observations;

1 There are three kinds of lies in this world; Lies, damned lies, and
statistics.
2 Figures never lie, but liars always figure.

[disclaimer: I may not have punctuation or wording exactly correct. Also,
one of those two may actually belong to Will Rogers. memory fails]

It is fallacious to try and conclude anything regarding quality from
statistical output. Judiciary activities are NOT binary. Rather, they are an
analog process and the UDRP isn't anywhere near as reliable or as
quantifiable as a Schmidt trigger.

Designing a system that is biased towards the plaintif whilst also blocking
the defendant's access to more fair systems, does not only catch the obvious
violations, it denies the non-violating defendants fair access to legitimate
grievance. IOW, it also persecutes the innocent as a necessary by-product.
It assumes that there are no innocent defendants. It is the equivalent of
presumed guilt until proven innocent. It has all the inherent evils and
abuses of Napoleonic justice.

As problematic as the legal system is, it is still the more fair system and
the UDRP usurps that system.



--
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