Re: [ga-roots] How the sky might fall

[Eric Dierker <eric@hi-tek.com>]

It is getting to a point where commercial/competitive forces are being
brought to the forefront.  While I certainly agree with Mssrs. Morfin and
Williams here I want to make a very strong point:  It is the lack of
government intervention here that tells the story, the USG intervenes when
they feel a need for intervention.  (check out Clancy's Net Force in the
future only enforcers of laws that already exist)  Our system has been
gradually and very strongly moving toward non-involvement unless there are
laws broken, ya we make some screwy laws to be broken, but no system ain't
broke a little. I have seen AOL and Microsoft, and soon to be Verisigh hit
with federal lawsuits but that is to protect us little guys.  If we are
allowed to let freedom reign on the www it will flourish.

I believe very strongly that our dotBIZ will flourish and that the strongly
warehoused and IP dominated ICANN dotbiz will not; without some major and I
mean major dough lost behind it.  Leah make sure your priceless names are
used and not warehoused, require a ninety day window to open up sites, get
your people to hammer ISPs with requests give a couple great names away for
promotion.  I know it is hard to think in competitive terms but you must, and
you must demand that the TLDA stand behind you.  You can beat this deal
because they will warehouse and sunshine the obsurd dotbiz to death.

Just some non-passionate thoughts.

Sincerely,
Eric

Jeff Williams wrote:

> WXW and all,
>
> William X. Walsh wrote:
>
> > Hello Jefsey,
> >
> > Tuesday, June 05, 2001, 4:29:17 AM, Jefsey Morfin wrote:
> > > All boils down to Mike Roberts'  K$ 50. Would the iCANN have
> > > carry its job as a per a decent reading of the WhitePaper/ByLaws
> > > getting sponsoring as an educational, research or charity service
> > > to the community and made TLD registration paid at cost ($ 20
> > > as documented by the Linux community) it would financially
> > > flourish and none of the current problems would exist.
> >
> > If you want to have any credibility to your arguments, Jefsey, you
> > have to at least make an effort to be realistic.
>
>   I for one did not see anything in Jefsey's comments that would indicate
> a modicum of unrealistic though...
>
> >
> >
> > Personally, I don't find the $50,000 application fee to be as
> > excessive as others have.
>
>   That's fine.  The Congress and Senate committees didn't see it you way
> WXW.  But thank you for sharing the revolution with us anyway...
>
> >
> >
> > But a minimum set of both business, financial, and technical standards
> > must exist, and before granting the application, those issues must be
> > reviewed, investigated, followed up on, etc.
>
>   Business standards change rather regularly in the fast moving business
> world.  Financial standards do as well, although not quite a quickly.
> Technical standards change on a average of every 9 months os so
> in the IT industry.
>
> >
> >
> > The costs of doing that are not cheap, and an application fee such as
> > that does serve a purpose in setting a minimum standard for financial
> > solvency.  If the $50,000 fee is too much, then perhaps that company
> > is not well suited financially to be running a registry.
>
>   This is a nice statement but has little to do with a non-refundable
> US $50k fee being charged by  a non-profit corp. (ICANN in this case),
> for simple consideration for running a registry for a TLD.  We have
> already
> seen in fact that other non-ICANN registries can perform the task
> rather nicely and didn't need to pony up a nonrefundable US $50k
> fee to show their competence or ability...
>
> >
> >
> > While I don't see the $50,000 as necessarily excessive, I would be
> > open to backing a proposal for a lower fee in the next round provided
> > that a REALISTIC fee was proposed, and all of the other issues were
> > addressed (minimum standards).
>
>   Any fee for such a process of determination is unwarranted and not
> fiscally supportable for a Non-Profit corp. who's financial support
> is mandated by law to be at least 33% donation based under
> 501 (C3) status.
>
> >
> >
> > The alt.root people don't particularly like that argument, since in
> > their book being able to get one person to add a couple lines of
> > config in a nameserver has been their only requirement, but it would
> > help their credibility if they would recognize that minimum standards
> > must exist, and help to come up with a REASONABLE set of standards.
>
>   They have already done so.  Are doing so now, and have a better track
> record for availability than does NSI/VRSN.
>
> >
> >
> > If a company doesn't have $250,000 or more in liquid capital or line
> > of credit, I don't think they should even be considered.
>
>   I agree that at least this amount should be available.  But it should
> not
> be a requirement.
>
> >  They lack
> > the necessary financial means to insure the operation and development
> > of their registry.
>
>   Just because they don't have what you propose ($250k) in liquid or
> otherwise available capitol before applying for a registry accreditation,
> doesn't meant that they can't quickly aquire it after such a registry
> is in fact delegated, and therefore shouldn't mean that they are not
> fiscally sound enough to run a registry in the early stages...
>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > William X Walsh
> > mailto:william@userfriendly.com
> > Owner, Userfriendly.com
> > Userfriendly.com Domains
> > The most advanced domain lookup tool on the net
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>
> Regards,
>
> --
> Jeffrey A. Williams
> Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 118k members strong!)
> CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
> Contact Number:  972-447-1800 x1894 or 214-244-4827
> Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
>
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga-roots@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga-roots" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

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