RE: [wg-c] Re: A question about .INT (Fwd for Mike StJohns)

["William X. Walsh" <william@dso.net>]

On 14-Dec-1999 Eric Brunner wrote:
> 
> ------- Forwarded Message
> 
> To: Eric Brunner <brunner@world.std.com>
> cc: wg-c@dnso.org
> Subject: Re: A question about .INT 
> In-reply-to: Your message of Mon, 13 Dec 1999 20:24:33 -0500.
>              <199912140124.UAA07482@world.std.com> 
> Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1999 18:24:12 -0800
> From: "Mike StJohns" <stjohns@corp.home.net>
> X-UIDL: e6e7ffd384a539fa75fcf52bfdd8881f
> 
>> Hi Mike,
>> 
>> There is a person on a mailing list who seems to have a propriatary interest
>> in .INT, or is equivalently free associating. Here's the blurp in question:
>> 
>> >From the standpoint of economic policy, one new
>> >TLD, devoted to some relatively minor market segment such as
>> >.mus, will tell us absolutely nothing about any trademark or
>> >competition policy considerations that might be posed by the
>> >addition of new TLDs. A .mus TLD might be lucky to get 500 new
>> >registrations in its first year. What would we know at the end
>> >of that period? Nothing new. We had similar experiences with the
>> >addition of .int a few years ago.
>> 
>> The author of this oddly pronouned prose appears to think that .INT was
>> conceived in joy and welcomed without reserve -- not quite the way you
>> recounted in Minneapolis. A $.25 tour of the history of .INT would be in
>> order. If you are too busy (or wouldn't touch this with a 10' pole), not
>> to worry. This is just a side issue. It just bothers me when people fake
>> what they need to make a point, when the truth is out there.

I declare Eric Brunner the winner of this years "Excellence in taking comments out of
Context to suit his own ends" award. 

--
William X. Walsh - DSo Networks
Email: william@dso.net  Fax:(209) 671-7934