Re: [wg-c] Eureka?

["Ross Wm. Rader" <ross@ebarn.com>]

Tell you what, you do it, and get back to me with your results - it sounds
like your cup of tea.

Your analogy is probably the weakest one I have seen on this list.
Individual TLDs represent a scarce resource - burgers are not. There can
only be one rader.com and one rader.web - the value of each, determined by
the market. Creating additional TLDs, or divesting existing ones has no
effect on the value of other TLDs.

This discussion is not about how registries can differentiate themselves,
but rather how we can go about adding new TLDs to the root in a sane manner.

Unless there is a disconnect between the ownership of the TLD and the
registry, the fiefdoms that we suffer under now will only get worse.

-RWR
----- Original Message -----
From: Christopher Ambler <cambler@iodesign.com>
To: Ross Wm. Rader <ross@ebarn.com>; <rmeyer@mhsc.com>; Kent Crispin
<kent@songbird.com>; <wg-c@dnso.org>
Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] Eureka?


> > gTLD registries need to be run in the interests of the internet public
>
> And fast food joints need to be run in the interests of the
> burger-eating public.
>
> Quick, let's divest the Big Mac and Whopper and rename them
> the "fast burger one" and "fast burger two" and let McDonalds
> and Burger King differentiate themselves on the value-added
> quality of their ketchup.
>
> Christopher