Re: [ga] [ncdnhc-discuss] Re: WLS proposal

[James Love <james.love@cptech.org>]

John, I am a member of the Transfers TK, and I proposed something different 
than the WLS.   Specifically, I proposed a 30 day period during which people 
could register for a lottery for the expired domain, and that during this 30 
day period, at any time, the original domain holder could get it back. 
Anyone who wanted the expired domain could contact the original domain name 
holder, and suggest they get the domain back and sell it to them.  So if any 
auction develops, it will be with the original domain holder, not the 
registrar.   The original domain name holder benefits the most from this 
system.  They are more likely to catch mistakes, or could sell the domain to 
an interested party.

The only case where there would be a speed dial type "race" would be if the 
domain was really expired, and no one bother to sign up for the lottery.

   Jamie

John Berryhill wrote:
>>I don't care about "average registrants" seeking to register the
>>domain, but it does make sense to create a system that (a) protects the
>>original domain holder if a mistake was made,
> 
> 
> That is not a function of WLS as proposed.  The last person anyone on the
> WLS wants to know about an expiring domain name is the registrant.  That, in
> fact, was my objection to registrar participation in SnapNames many moons
> ago - it provides an incentive for registrars to fail to notify their own
> registrants of domain expiration.
> 
> Grace period or not, mistakes will continue to be made.  How many people
> look at the grace period of various of their bills as constituting the
> "real" deadline.  I, for one, do.  In my case, failure to obtain a dial tone
> is the usual method by which I am apprised of the amount and deadline of my
> telephone bill.  That's just me, but I am surely representative of some
> population of domain name registrants.
> 
> Oops, no cable TV tonight...
> 
> 
>>(b) doesn't require
>>people to
>>speed dial to "win" the expired domains,
> 
> 
> That's right, with WLS as proposed, the race is to get on the WLS.  Same
> race, different finish line.
> 
> http://www.dnso.com/comics/2002/Apr/3/
> 
> 
> 
>>If there is going to be a
>>bidding system
>>going on, they can bid directly with the old domain holder,
>>rather than with
>>the registrars.
> 
> 
> Why is it preferable to have the old domain holder conduct an auction, as
> opposed to the registrars, or anyone else.  Why does a technical
> coordination system care who gets paid the same money?  The question is, is
> something broken and in need of fixing?
> 
> 
>>Giving domains to those who are good at "being
>>first" when
>>domains expire seems a bit weird to me,
> 
> 
> RFC1591 may be weird, but it remains RFC1591.
> 
> 
> 
>> A brief period to express interest followed by
>>a lottery
>>allows people to get a good night's sleep.
> 
> 
> That's more or less what is going on now - nobody knows who is going to get
> an expiring domain names, and everyone who wants one takes their chances
> with one system or another.
> 
> 
>>    Well, if it comes to that, who cares?
> 
> 
> Whatever it comes to, it will come to another set of rules upon which clever
> people will construct clever strategies.  The only difference is that all of
> the money will go into one pocket instead of several.  That much is a
> certainty.
> 
> Sort of like the byzantine rules for .museum names, which prudently allocate
> swiss.frog.museum to the Swiss Frog Museum, rather than
> frog.swiss.museum....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 



-- 
------
James Love, Consumer Project on Technology
http://www.cptech.org, mailto:love@cptech.org
voice: 1.202.387.8030; mobile 1.202.361.3040


--
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