Re: [wg-review] 11. IDNH Centers of Interest

[J J Teernstra <terastra@terabytz.co.nz>]

At 07:04 12/01/01 +1300, DPF wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 13:31:42 +0100, Robin Miller wrote:
>
>>> The 200 odd members of the CA/IDNO support the term owners.
>>
>>I don't support the term. I guess that makes it 199 odd members. I
remember not
>>being alone in my opinion. So strike a few more from the 199.
>
>For the record I prefer the term holder to owner also (and am a member
>of IDNO).  Domain Names are not sold by registries because if they
>were that would imply registries owned the names in the first place
>before selling them.
>

Registries are not selling Domain Names to registrants. They are selling
services. It's easy to agree on that.

But let's keep the topic of naming the Constituency that we all (bar one, so
far) want to a discussion and consensus within the Constituency. 
A Constituency must define itself.

If the word Holder is a prerequisite for being acceptable by the NC, then
let's hear that from the NC members, who are on the Task Force and present here.

--Joop

--
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