RE: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do

["Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>]

It was a quick note because I was headed out the door at the time.
Sorry, I won't do that again. Terse don't cut it.

The context was that of complaining about costs and margins, with an
implication of profiteerng on NSI's part. I was back-handedly making a
point that we don't need more TLDs as much as we need more TLD
registries. Further, having competing registries would drop prices quick
enough to suit even D'Crock. If he'd drop some of his objections and
obstructions we'd be able to get on with it quicker.

My objections are that no one, that is not a stockholder, has a right to
profit margin data for a private business.If they want to complain about
the margins they can take their business somewhere else. The catch is
that there is no where else to go. Whose fault is that? It is certainly
not the fault of NSI. We can only look towards those who shot down eDNS,
AlterNET, and the other RSC's (rationale is irrelevent) and the
single-minded wrong-headedness of the CORE/MoU/IAHC crowd and the
Utopians among us that  think making a profit is somehow an evil act.

The litmus test fro this claim is simple. Who is willing to let both
for-profit and non-profit registry business models co-exist vs who wants
exclusively non-profit and tightly regulated registries to exist? One
side is flexible and the other isn't (regulators). Who is then being
obstructionistic? Obviously, it is those who want to compromise the
least. Those "one-way" folk that only want *their* way and will spread
as much FUD as necessary to get it.

Well I'm here to tell y'all that the commercial camp is not about to
co-operate with their own extinction. The White Paper guaranteed an open
look to ALL points of view, not just a free railroad ticket for the
Utopians. I aim to take to issues with that promise in-hand.

If we don't reach some sort of compromise, on this single issue, then
this WG will never come to a resolution unless y'all shut the candidate
RSC's completely out of it. But, guess what, disenfranchisement is not
consensus. I think the ethical among us know that.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-wg-c@dnso.org [mailto:owner-wg-c@dnso.org]On
> Behalf Of Ross
> Wm. Rader
> Sent: Thursday, August 26, 1999 12:19 PM
> To: rmeyer@mhsc.com; Christopher Ambler; Dave Crocker
> Cc: mueller@syr.edu; wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: [wg-c] breaking up (names) is hard to do
>
>
> > Quick Note: It is only you business which registry you use.
> Unless you
> > pay NSI's rent, or are an NSI stockholder, it ain't your
> business. Legal
> > and otherwise.
>
> ?
>
> I'm sorry if I missed your point, but if I interpret this
> correctly, your
> logic goes completely against every free market tenet that I
> am aware of.
>
> Please fill me in.
>
> -RWR
>
>
>