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

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

I had proposed a lottery, either one chance person, or one per registrar. 
But if you had an auction, it would be more acceptable if the proceeds went 
to the previous domain holder.

jamie


Don Brown wrote:
> To be clear also, I don't find anything wrong with Ross's proposition
> of a "cooling tank."  Furthermore, for the sake of clarity, I am not
> in favor of "any" auction model.
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> 
> Tuesday, June 18, 2002, 9:39:27 PM, Ross Wm. Rader <ross@tucows.com> wrote:
> RWR> To be clear, Jamie Love re-proposed the auction model. I was putting forward
> RWR> the new concept of the "cooling tank".
> 
> RWR> Thanks,
> 
> RWR> -rwr
> 
> 
> RWR> ----- Original Message -----
> RWR> From: "Don Brown" <donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net>
> RWR> To: <owner-ga@dnso.org>; "Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@tucows.com>
> RWR> Cc: "James Love" <james.love@cptech.org>; "John Berryhill"
> RWR> <john@johnberryhill.com>; <ga@dnso.org>; "Transfer TF (E-mail)"
> RWR> <nc-transfer@dnso.org>
> RWR> Sent: Tuesday, June 18, 2002 9:20 PM
> RWR> Subject: Re: [ga] [ncdnhc-discuss] Re: WLS proposal
> 
> 
> 
>>>I don't see anything wrong with the concept explained by Ross, below.
>>>
>>>It gives the original registrant much more time to realize they have
>>>an expired domain name and it removes the conflict of interest
>>>potential for the Registrar and Registry, during a much short time
>>>period.
>>>
>>>Furthermore, NetSol/VeriSign shouldn't have a problem with this
>>>extended period, either, since they have, in fact, been hoarding
>>>expired names for a considerably longer period of time. Although, my
>>>bet is that they will use it as an excuse to ask for a price increase.
>>>I could be psychic - time will tell.
>>>
>>>
>>>Tuesday, June 18, 2002, 4:37:08 AM, Ross Wm. Rader <ross@tucows.com>
>>
> RWR> wrote:
> 
>>>>>Specifically, I proposed a 30 day period during which people
>>>>>could register for a lottery for the expired domain, and that during
>>>>
> RWR> this
> 
>>>RWR> 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
>>>>
>>>RWR> name
>>>
>>>>>holder, and suggest they get the domain back and sell it to them.  So
>>>>
> RWR> if
> 
>>>RWR> any
>>>
>>>>>auction develops, it will be with the original domain holder, not the
>>>>>registrar.   The original domain name holder benefits the most from
>>>>
> RWR> this
> 
>>>>>system.  They are more likely to catch mistakes, or could sell the
>>>>
> RWR> domain
> 
>>>RWR> to
>>>
>>>>>an interested party.
>>>>
>>>RWR> We talked about something similar on the last call.
>>>
>>>RWR> Realizing that a lot of the speculative value of a domain lies with
>>
> RWR> the
> 
>>>RWR> goodwill that accrues to it because of the initial registrant, it was
>>>RWR> proposed that all domain names slated for deletion are put into a
>>
> RWR> cooling
> 
>>>RWR> tank for x days beyond the 30 days described in the Redemption Grace
>>
> RWR> Period
> 
>>>RWR> proposal.
>>>
>>>RWR> This would create a situation whereby registrants would be guaranteed
>>
> RWR> a
> 
>>>RWR> right of re-registration "if they forgot to renew" and eliminate or
>>
> RWR> diminish
> 
>>>RWR> trainspotting by ensuring a prolonged 404-like condition over a
>>
> RWR> reasonably
> 
>>>RWR> extended period of time before the name was deleted. Once cooled, the
>>
> RWR> domain
> 
>>>RWR> could be deleted and re-registered by anyone on a first-come, first
>>
> RWR> served
> 
>>>RWR> basis (and get a name relatively free of baggage).
>>>
>>>RWR> In my mind, this proposal has much to commend it in its simplicity
>>
> RWR> and
> 
>>>RWR> perceived effectiveness.
>>>
>>>RWR> -rwr
>>>
>>>
>>>RWR> --
>>>RWR> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
>>>RWR> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
>>>RWR> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
>>>RWR> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>----
>>>Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
>>>donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
>>>PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
>>>Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
>>>----
>>>
>>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
> donbrown_l@inetconcepts.net         http://www.inetconcepts.net
> PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
> Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> ----
> 
> --
> 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
> 
> 
> 



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