Re: Re: [wg-review] Proposal for ICANN Board electors and funding.

["Chris McElroy" <watch-dog@inreach.com>]

You are welcome to address me directly Ken. The post is relevant when some
think Individuals should pay again for representation when they already do
so. Just because someone disagrees with you does not mean they are off
topic. And yes I do have a beef. A beef about people's rights getting
stepped on and this IS the place to do that. If I was looking for just any
forum there are many to choose from.

The UDRP has already been brought up and not by me, Ken. The representation
of Registrars and not individuals was also a subject I didn't initiate. Have
you read the rest of the posts to this list or only those that support your
point of view?

What is it YOU consider the focus, Ken? Besides who will pay for what.


Chris McElroy aka NameCritic

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ken Stubbs" <kstubbs@dninet.net>
To: <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>; <wg-review@dnso.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 10:23 AM
Subject: Re: Re: [wg-review] Proposal for ICANN Board electors and funding.


> sotiris....
>
> this a perfect example of what i was talking about earlier. here is
someone
> with a beef looking for any "forum" for their complaints and, frankly, the
> the only thing  this kind of posting wil accomplish  is  starting a thread
> that will take this group "way off focus".
>
> what do we discuss next  ? cybersquatting, cyperpiracy,  the UDRP,
hoarding,
> ????
>
> simple formula here   ....... " loss of focus = loss of creditability "
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
> To: <wg-review@dnso.org>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 3:34 PM
> Subject: Fwd: Re: [wg-review] Proposal for ICANN Board electors and
funding.
>
>
> > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic asked me to forward the following message
as
> he sent it to me twice:
> >
> > ------- Start of forwarded message -------
> > From: "Chris McElroy" <watch-dog@inreach.com>
> > To: <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
> > Subject: Re: Re: [wg-review] Proposal for ICANN Board electors and
> funding.
> > Date: 1/2/01 12:14:08 PM
> >
> > As one member of this list stated, he owns over 300 domain names. How
much
> > has he got invested? Add the figures. Where does everyone think the
> > Registrars GET the money they contribute? Simple math. Just that one
> member
> > has contributed significantly more than 10-25 dollars to the process and
> > continues to do so through renewals even with Registrars being allowed
to
> > pull every dirty trick in the business. Hoarding Expired Domain Names to
> > sell them for more than mere Registration, using fronts to register
names
> > then adding an additional charge to move the name to another registrar
> which
> > is still owned by the same registrar, and signing deals with companies
> like
> > SnapNames to give them first shot at expired names before the general
> public
> > in return for a share of the profits SnapNames makes on the expired
names.
> > If anyone should pay more of the associated fees, look to the Registrars
> to
> > provide it especially when they are allowed to be as unethical as they
> want
> > to be with no reprimands forthcoming from ICANN. They ignore the problem
> as
> > a way to endorse it..
> >
> > Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Sotiropoulos" <sotiris@hermesnetwork.com>
> > To: <wg-review@dnso.org>
> > Sent: Tuesday, January 02, 2001 10:59 AM
> > Subject: Fwd: Re: [wg-review] Proposal for ICANN Board electors and
> funding.
> >
> >
> > > 1/2/01 8:42:51 AM, "Peter de Blanc" <pdeblanc@usvi.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >At-Large could charge "dues" of, say $ 10 to $ 25 per year.
> > > >Other groups could get commercial donors or sponsorships, with the
> > > >sponsor(s) getting a logo and credit  on that group's web page.
> > > >
> > > >Representation with taxation, Everybody pays to play.
> > >
> > >
> > > Mr. deBlanc,
> > >
> > > As has already been pointed out by myself and others, Name Holders ARE
> the
> > ones providing the FUNDS!  Name Holders are the ones buying
> > > DOMAINS!  I think that constituency has already paid its fair share.
> What
> > about WIPO and certain others?
> > >
> > > I believe the issue of representation is a little more serious than a
> game
> > people "play".
> > >
> > > Sotiris Sotiropoulos
> > >           Hermes Network, Inc.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -------- End of forwarded message --------
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
This message was passed to you via the wg-review@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe wg-review" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html