Re: [registrars] Registrar Code of Conduct (RCoC)

[Jim Archer <jarcher@registrationtek.com>]

I have no idea what motivated it and I'm not saying I am opposed to it, nor 
do I wish any such implication to be drawn from my question.  Conversely, I 
am not saying I support it or that I want that implication to be drawn from 
the previous sentance.  In fact, I'll be clear:  I take no position at this 
time on the content of the document.  None.

Now, on to the real issue.  Even if we were "directed" to create such a 
thing, it seems that the membership, **at a very minimum**, needs to (1) 
agree that we want such a thing (because we can still say no), (2) be 
actively involved in its creation should we decide we want one and (3) 
approve its content and posting before it is posted and we are told we 
"can" sign on to it.

Both having and not having your companies name attached to such a thing 
speaks volumes, but I can't say for sure I know exactly what is being said. 
Its very existence forces members of the DNSO to make a public statement 
that is not without political overtones, while those companies which are 
not members of the DNSO are free to point out that they lack the option to 
sign it because they are not members.  This may tend to put members of the 
DNSO in a difficult, unfair and unwanted position.

So what is this, an attempt to reduce membership?  Of course not, but it 
may well have that effect.  For one, I feel that the posting of this 
document publicly without the prior formal approval of the DNSO membership, 
especially in DRAFT form, is a grave error and that registrars should not 
be compelled to sign on to it, and also should not be compelled to refuse 
to sign it.

In short, I think it needs to come down immediately, before the serious 
trouble starts. No one has yet signed on to it, so if it comes down now, no 
harm done.

Jim


--On Monday, May 13, 2002 7:08 PM -0700 "Robert F. Connelly" 
<rconnell@psi-japan.com> wrote:

> At 08:47 PM 5/13/02 -0400, Jim Archer wrote:
>> Perhaps I missed something, but I don't recall the DNSO voting to adopt
>> an  interim code of conduct and post it as something officially created
>> by the  DNSO.  Was such a vote taken?
>
> The way I heard it, ICANN *directed* us to create one.  Regards, BobC
>


*****************************
Jim Archer, CEO
Registration Technologies, Inc.
10 Crestview Drive
Greenville, RI 02828
voice: 401-949-4768
fax: 401-949-5814
jarcher@RegistrationTek.com
http://www.RegistrationTek.com