Re: [wg-c] SV: Consensus and compromises...

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

I would hardly call your efforts "involved" at this stage.

IOD has a barely operational website - if you spent half of your time
working towards an operation infrastructure as opposed to threatening to
sue into the root, I am sure that your credibility would benefit.

As I implied earlier, this is tangential, irrelevant and counterproductive.
If you do not have anything to add to this process other than "IOD will
sue", then please stand aside.

Threat of litigation is hardly a counterproposal to my position.

-RWR
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ambler <cambler@iodesign.com>
To: wg-c@dnso.org <wg-c@dnso.org>
Date: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 12:01 AM
Subject: Re: [wg-c] SV: Consensus and compromises...


>>As far as I am concerned, during the test-bed, I would like to see gTLDs
>>introduced that have no prior use by existing "registries".
>
>Non-starter that will surely cause legal action. I strongly doubt that
>CORE would sit by and allow a newcomer to begin operation while
>they have to wait. Same for Iperdome, IOD, and the few others who
>have been involved in this process for quite some time now.
>
>Christopher