Subject: GA-DIGEST V1 #997
From: [email-masked] (GA-DIGEST)
To: [email-masked]

GA-DIGEST         Wednesday, January 16 2002         Volume 01 : Number 997

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 21:46:44 -0800
From: Ron Wiener <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.  Benefit  s of the  Few

Walsh,

The data is based on only active subscriptions in our system, not historical
sales records.  You can't get fresher data than this.  If you refuse to read
the material, I refuse to answer any more of your unproductive questions.  

- -Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: William X Walsh [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 7:13 PM
> To: William X Walsh
> Cc: Ron Wiener; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
> Registrars@Dnso. Org
> Subject: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.
> Benefit s of the Few
> 
> Tuesday, Tuesday, January 15, 2002, 7:10:44 PM, William X Walsh wrote:
> 
> > Tuesday, Tuesday, January 15, 2002, 6:41:58 PM, Ron Wiener wrote:
> 
> >> William,
> 
> >> I don't know how you missed it, but in the attached - a copy of what
> was
> >> posted this morning - we answered your specific questions regarding our
> >> customer mix in great detail, pie chart and all.
> 
> > No, all you do is use the numbers to throw up more smokescreens,
> > and used data that is over 1 year old, before your company had really
> > swung into the position it is in now.
> 
> Correction, data that is nearly 2 years old.
> 
> You seriously want us to take you seriously when you play these kinds
> of shenanigans?
> 
> --
> Best regards,
> William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
> --
> 
> "There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
> the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
> interprets the truth."
> -- Jean Giradoux
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 00:55:23 -0500
From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits of the  Few

> freely quoting Chuck Gomes who all so sudden dissapeared, they will be
> looking for a broader input as of Jan 18th

That's sort of my point here Abel. Despite declarations to the contrary,
there are really only three parties at the table right now - the registrars,
SnapNames and Verisign. While this may change in the future, it is
impossible for anyone to claim support for this proposition (DNSO-wise)
outside of these circles. The policy implications impact many more than
these three parties. As I've mentioned previously, *everyone* formally
involved in the process thus far is self-interested - but somehow this
should be shameful, even if the rules for the consultation dictated to us by
the monopoly require it.

Consultation must occur, consensus must be demonstrated or the proposition
must be dropped. The rules are very simple.

But, this is just another self-interested viewpoint - we should all probably
just let this drop and move on to issues that don't affect us directly -
myself included.

- -rwr

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:12:47 -0800
From: Eric Dierker <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] further notification

Mr. Mann provided us with a great mailing list.

May I impose upon this GA to write me neat concise three line catch
phrases that I may forward on to the fine list of VIPs.  I will be
compiling the mailing list and sending it out in my afternoon/evenining,
16th.

My hope is to have several and copy them and send them off to catch
attention.  If we have some good ones
perhaps we can get them to participate.

You know, nothing so gross as; Hey Mr., McCain this is your job how
about doing it?

But maybe something more like;  If you do not recognize our efforts Mr.
McCain we will be be forced to endorse your opponents.  Okay that is no
good.

Mr. McCain as members of the sole bottom up group representing the
interests of your voters and true Internet stakeholders would you be so
benevolent as to lend us your ear, and assign us an aid to relate
matters to in the interest of furthering the internet.

Sincerely,
Eric

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

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:12:45 -0800
From: William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re[7]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.   Benefit  s of the  Few

Tuesday, Tuesday, January 15, 2002, 9:46:44 PM, Ron Wiener wrote:

> Walsh,

> The data is based on only active subscriptions in our system, not historical
> sales records.  You can't get fresher data than this.  If you refuse to read
> the material, I refuse to answer any more of your unproductive questions.  

Active subscriptions from January 2000.

2 years ago.

That's the freshest data you can provide?

That was even before the restrictions on domain deletions causes a
boon to your business model, and even before you had anywhere near as
many registrar contracts as you do now.

I have a hard time considering that data "fresh" and I also have a
hard time seeing your answers as anything resembling "productive."

What you refuse to answer is the charge, which appear to admit above,
that you are using out of date data to try and twist things around and
pretend your major source of revenue is not from domain speculators.

What I have to wonder, is why are you not providing more recent data?

I can speculate on that of course, and of course my speculation would
be that it would show that the assumptions being made about your
business model and its attractiveness have been correct.

Feel free to provide some more recent data to refute this.

- -- 
Best regards,
William X Walsh <[email-masked]>
- --

"There is no better way to exercise the imagination than the study of
the law. No artist ever interpreted nature as freely as a lawyer
interprets the truth."
- -- Jean Giradoux

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

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2002 00:35:59 -0800
From: Jeff Williams <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits of the  Few

Ross and all assembly members,

Ross Wm. Rader wrote:

> > and determined Position on the Delete issue.  Currently with the
> > recent comments of our new Chair, Thomas Rossler, it doesn't
> > seem that we will be given the RIGHT to vote on this and perhaps
>
> For some reason, only a very narrow selection of impacted stakeholders were
> requested to feedback on the VGRS proposal. I have heard rumblings that this
> may be expanded in the future, but this is only rumor at this point. It may
> be the case that the registrar constituency was selected to "guinea pig" the
> proposal in order that something more mature could be presented to the rest
> of the DNSO - time will tell I suppose.

  The this proposal was selected as a "guinea pig" to buy time (For whom
I am not sure no do I understand why) for a  more mature proposal to
be developed, it would seem than that a WG for Delete and the poll
that I posted for the GA members can only help determine or clarify
at least the members of the DNSO GA.
  However I am sure others would prefer a TF for Delete where
participation
is limited and thereby unrepresentative accordingly.  However a more
straight forward approach would be, or would have been more
appropriate and cause much less confusion as the WLS proposal
announcement has done or at least seemingly done.  So your right
IMHO that time will tell...  The only problem that I have and the
registrants
may have, is that as time passes, trust decreases and any future
proposal
will possibly suffer from creditability as a result.

>
>
> -rwr
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jeff Williams" <[email-masked]>
> To: "Don Brown" <[email-masked]>
> Cc: "genie@ magi" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 16, 2002 1:33 AM
> Subject: Re: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits
> of the Few
>
> > Don and all assembly members,
> >
> >   Don, your quite right.  In this country, my country, TX, >;) we have
> > a right, and I would argue a duty, to vote.  However the GA members
> > are not being given that opportunity on many issues, the "Delete and WLS"
> > issues or most recent interest.  This is why I and I believe Patrick
> > put out two polls for the DNSO GA members to demonstrate their
> > VOTE.  I believe that given an opportunity without fear of some
> > sort of retribution, GA members will vote.  I believe that we
> > NEED a "Delete WG" in order to come up with a GA generated
> > and determined Position on the Delete issue.  Currently with the
> > recent comments of our new Chair, Thomas Rossler, it doesn't
> > seem that we will be given the RIGHT to vote on this and perhaps
> > other issues that need addressing for instance the .ORG v5.4
> > final report from the .ORG TF, unless it happens to be a issue
> > that Thomas, our newly elected chair supports....
> >
> > Don Brown wrote:
> >
> > > So, it appears that those who chose to vote represented the majority,
> > > in terms of market share. Clearly, then, Ross's statement was correct
> > > in that sense.
> > >
> > > However, I submit that Ross's statement was also correct with respect
> > > to the issue raised by Ron Wiener, about the 75 non-voting/not counted
> > > registrars.
> > >
> > > In this country,  TX :), we all have a right to vote, but we must get
> > > involved in the process by registering to vote and actually going to
> > > the polls. It seems to me that these 75 chose not to be involved,
> > > since no one has presented any facts to the contrary.
> > >
> > > Therefore, regardless of market share, Ross was correct in his
> > > statement.  When folks don't get involved, register and cast a ballot,
> > > no one counts their vote -- to do so is mere speculation.
> > >
> > > Accordingly, Ron Wiener's issue about the 75 other Registrars fails on
> > > its face, making it moot.
> > >
> > > On the opposite end of the spectrum, there has been no factual
> > > presentation of those who do favor WLS.  Besides Snap and the
> > > Registry, who actually favors and supports WLS?  I mean hard facts,
> > > not conjecture and speculation.
> > >
> > > At the very least, those opposed to WLS can be quantified.
> > >
> > > Tuesday, January 15, 2002, 4:25:52 PM, genie@ magi <[email-masked]>
> wrote:
> > > gm> William:
> > > >>Perhaps you can clear up, Ron, exactly what percentage of new
> > > >>registrations those 75 non-participating registrars are responsible
> > > >>for (exclusing Verisign's own registrar, of course, whose conflict of
> > > >>interest is clear).
> > > >>
> > > >>The number of registrars is less important to me, and probably to
> > > >>most, than the number of registrations they are responsible for.
> > >
> > > gm> Using some data available
> > > gm> (bowrrowing David's math from
> > > gm> http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/ga/Arc09/msg00258.html
> > > gm> can anyone please help with the blanks?
> > >
> > > gm> EST
> > > gm> Marketshare
> > > gm> ------Registrar-------------------------WLS
> > > gm>       AW Registry (all west) mike brown opposed
> > > gm> 1.80% ENOM - Paul       opposed
> > > gm> 1.07% Tim - GoDaddy     opposed
> > > gm>       Ken Stubbs - CORE/NC
> > > gm>       Bob Connly - PSI Japan    obstain
> > > gm> 11.17% Elona - Register.com     opposed
> > > gm>       Donny Simonton - Intercosmos      opposed
> > > gm>       Steve - DomainBank        opposed
> > > gm>       Margie - Mark Monitor     obstain
> > > gm> 45.45% Bruce Bechwith - Verisign Registrar      n/c
> > > gm>       Mike Paliage
> > > gm>       Steinrl - Active ISP      obstain
> > > gm> 4.34% Bruce Tonkin - MelborneIT opposed
> > > gm> 5.23% Tom - Bulk Registrar      opposed
> > > gm> 1.51% Geoge - Dotster   opposed
> > > gm>       Sigfried - Joker  opposed
> > > gm> 8.38% Ross - Tucows     opposed
> > > gm> 2.66% Werner - CORE     opposed
> > > gm>       Tom - Slund.de    opposed
> > > gm>       Jason - Media Venture
> > > gm>       Alice's - Rick    opposed
> > > gm>       David W - IA Registry     opposed
> > > gm>       Speed Names - Nicoli      opposed
> > > gm>       Rob - NameScout   opposed
> > >
> > > >>
> > > >>If those 75 are responsible, collectively, for less than 50% of new
> > > >>registrations, and it wouldn't surprise me if the  percentage was
> > > >>VASTLY lower than that, then your points here are really
> > > >>insignificant, and self serving.
> > > >>
> > > gm> Cheers
> > > gm> Genie Livingstone
> > >
> > > gm> --
> > > gm> This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > gm> Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > gm> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > gm> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> > >
> > > ----
> > > Don Brown - Dallas, Texas USA     Internet Concepts, Inc.
> > > [email-masked]         http://www.inetconcepts.net
> > > PGP Key ID: 04C99A55              (972) 788-2364  Fax: (972) 788-5049
> > > Providing Internet Solutions Worldwide - An eDataWeb Affiliate
> > > ----
> > >
> > > --
> > > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> > Regards,
> > --
> > Jeffrey A. Williams
> > Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
> > CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
> > Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
> > E-Mail [email-masked]
> > Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
> > Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
> >
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
> > Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
> >
> >

Regards,

- --
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 121k members/stakeholdes strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [email-masked]
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 22:34:24 -0800 (PST)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.   Benefit  s of the  Few

Hello,

> The data is based on only active subscriptions in our system, not
> historical
> sales records.  You can't get fresher data than this.  If you refuse
> to read
> the material, I refuse to answer any more of your unproductive
> questions.  

Active data is also incomplete data. For instance, SnapNames uses the
term "holding" when referring to SnapBack positions. Suppose Ivanna
Lottadomains buys a SnapBack, and ten days later SnapNames successfully
gets it for her. She then buys another SnapBack, and 36 days later she
gets another name. By your measurement, this individual is classified
and only "holding" one Snapback at any one time, yet might register 15
names.

I still await replies to prior questions, which I've noticed other
people have begun to ask on the Registrars list. What is an abusive
speculator? Please supply the name of a single registrar who you know
is abusing the system, just one (and also explain how SnapNames doesn't
get caught by the net of its own definition, given the prior analysis
of the Hot 100 list and via the activities of its registrar partners).

Also, you seem to be making the suggestion lately that "no one really
knows" what would happen, so let's do a test of the WLS anyway, to find
out. What if instead we do a test whereby SnapNames.com shuts down for
a year, to see what happens? Isn't that what you're asking all your
competitors to do?

Another direct question that hasn't been answered -- are existing
SnapBack holders being grandfathered? If not, when are the Sunrise and
Landrush periods for the WLS slots due to take place? By what process
will the Sunrise and Landrush unfold? What will happen to WLS
subscriptions bought in the final month of the "test period" (if they
last a year, that makes the test 2 years, not 1)?

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:01:02 -0800
From: Ron Wiener <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.  Benefit  s of the  Few

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

- ------_=_NextPart_000_01C19E5B.8F258D60
Content-Type: text/plain

George,

Perhaps you can specifically state what data you wish to see, and why you
wish to see it, that we have not already provided.  

Yes, your definition of holding = active subscriptions.  I presumed you
wanted the most current data available.  If what you really want is
historical data that is older, request it, and provide a reason why you
think it's even relevant.  

Your question regarding "abusive speculation" was answered IN FULL by
Cameron earlier this evening.  I'm attaching the e-mail as you've apparently
missed it. 

- -RW

> -----Original Message-----
> From: George Kirikos [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 10:34 PM
> To: Ron Wiener; [email-masked]'
> Cc: [email-masked]; Registrars@Dnso. Org
> Subject: RE: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.
> Benefit s of the Few
> 
> Hello,
> 
> > The data is based on only active subscriptions in our system, not
> > historical
> > sales records.  You can't get fresher data than this.  If you refuse
> > to read
> > the material, I refuse to answer any more of your unproductive
> > questions.
> 
> Active data is also incomplete data. For instance, SnapNames uses the
> term "holding" when referring to SnapBack positions. Suppose Ivanna
> Lottadomains buys a SnapBack, and ten days later SnapNames successfully
> gets it for her. She then buys another SnapBack, and 36 days later she
> gets another name. By your measurement, this individual is classified
> and only "holding" one Snapback at any one time, yet might register 15
> names.
> 
> I still await replies to prior questions, which I've noticed other
> people have begun to ask on the Registrars list. What is an abusive
> speculator? Please supply the name of a single registrar who you know
> is abusing the system, just one (and also explain how SnapNames doesn't
> get caught by the net of its own definition, given the prior analysis
> of the Hot 100 list and via the activities of its registrar partners).
> 
> Also, you seem to be making the suggestion lately that "no one really
> knows" what would happen, so let's do a test of the WLS anyway, to find
> out. What if instead we do a test whereby SnapNames.com shuts down for
> a year, to see what happens? Isn't that what you're asking all your
> competitors to do?
> 
> Another direct question that hasn't been answered -- are existing
> SnapBack holders being grandfathered? If not, when are the Sunrise and
> Landrush periods for the WLS slots due to take place? By what process
> will the Sunrise and Landrush unfold? What will happen to WLS
> subscriptions bought in the final month of the "test period" (if they
> last a year, that makes the test 2 years, not 1)?
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> George Kirikos
> http://www.kirikos.com/
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
> http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

- ------_=_NextPart_000_01C19E5B.8F258D60
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Description: RE: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefit s of the  Few

Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
From: Cameron Powell <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Cc: "Registrars@Dnso. Org" <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefit
	 s of the  Few
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 18:28:43 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain

Dear George,

To keep the misinformation at a minimum, allow me to point out your two most
recent errors.  First, as we said several days ago on this very list serv
(in response to a post by Clint Page of Dotster):

Mr. Page is in error in alleging that we have ever stated that the growth in
our revenues will be "a direct result of the new WLS arrangement with
VeriSign."  Mr. Page is apparently reading press reports, but not, as he may
be implying, press releases by SnapNames itself.  SnapNames has never
claimed that its annual revenues would increase from $3 to $20 million "as a
direct result of the new WLS arrangement with VeriSign" because it is not
true; SnapNames has, in fact, a wide variety of new products and services,
as well as partnerships, that it plans to unveil in 2002.  All of these
initiatives together are expected to lead to the cited rise in revenue.
Such niceties get lost in breathless headlines.

Second, while I'm not sure it was we who used the term "abusive speculator"
(I note that we did recently quote Bruce Tonkin of MelbourneIT on the
subject), and while we are under no obligation to respond to your
interrogations, I'll point out for the other members of the list that we
have, in fact, discussed repeatedly what might be termed "abusive" tactics
of speculators.  Pages 16-17 of the October "State of the Domain" list
several, from intentional credit card fraud to abuse of the 5-day grace
period.  See http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainOct2001.pdf.
Page 20 of the August edition further discusses a distinction between
speculators who have superior foresight in being the first to register a
name, versus speculators who have superior access to other customers due to
their preferential treatment by registrars -- a state of affairs into which
we would invite congressional oversight.  See
http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainAug2001.pdf.  We have
also recently written that some registrars are violating the terms of the
regular, site-oriented Registry pool of connections by sending through it 5-
to 10-minute bursts of high-speed repetitive queries that belong only in the
third pool.  In short, abusive speculation involves secret or even
prohibited processes to register names which are not, by their nature, open
to all consumers, and which are unfair to those left out.

Aside from the obvious fact that we do not disclose information about our
customers, it should be clear from the above that customers who acquire
names through our all-comers-welcome, user-friendly service (including those
whose names end up on the Top 100) are not by so doing engaging in abusive
speculation.  And many of these customers are trademark owners re-acquiring
names in which they consider themselves to have intellectual property
rights.  See http://www.snapnames.com/corporate_clients.html.

(All contents of SnapNames' website are protected from direct copying by
applicable copyright laws.)

Sincerely,

Cameron Powell 
VP of Business Development and General Counsel 
SnapNames 
115 NW First Avenue  
Suite 300
Portland, OR  97209 
(503) 219-9990 x229    (503) 502-5030 cell    (503) 274-9749 fax 
[email-masked] 

Pioneering Provider of Secondary Market Infrastructures and Data Services
for Domain Names 

Cameron Powell 
VP of Business Development and General Counsel 
SnapNames 
115 NW First Avenue  
Suite 300
Portland, OR  97209 
(503) 219-9990 x229    (503) 502-5030 cell    (503) 274-9749 fax 
[email-masked] 

Pioneering Provider of Secondary Market Infrastructures and Data Services
for Domain Names 

- -----Original Message-----
From: George Kirikos [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 5:07 PM
To: Ron Wiener; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Cc: Registrars@Dnso. Org
Subject: RE: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.
Benefit s of the Few

Hello,

- --- Ron Wiener <[email-masked]> wrote:
> I think we'd all appreciate it if you did not regurgitate all the
> content
> everyone has already read.  I've responded to everything here already
> and
> won't do it twice.  

Since you only joined the DNSO GA list recently, and I've not seen
Chuck Gomes define an abusive speculator, perhaps you can point me to
the link where either has answered. I don't want you to answer it twice
- -- once will do. I have heard you say that the press "misquotes" you
often, so this provides you with a chance to reveal who these abusive
speculators are, once and for all. Is it NameWinner? Is it NicGenie? Is
it UltSearch? Is it BuyDomains? Is it me, with my fairly small
portfolio of names??? Who exactly is abusing the system, and by what
definition (and of course, show us how that definition does not apply
to SnapNames and its registration partners)?

When I go to http://www.snapnames.com/deleteprocess.html to read about
the Deletion Cycle, I see the words "Armies of Speculators" used. Since
you purport to know the the deleted domains industry better than
everyone else, I think the community would benefit from knowing exactly
who you think these abusers are, and relate them to the list in the Hot
100 that your own company provided.

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/

- ------_=_NextPart_000_01C19E5B.8F258D60--
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:09:33 -0800
From: Harold Whiting <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] Answers please.

At 09:46 PM 1/15/2002 -0800, Ron Wiener wrote:
>Walsh,
>
>The data is based on only active subscriptions in our system, not historical
>sales records.  You can't get fresher data than this.  If you refuse to read
>the material, I refuse to answer any more of your unproductive questions.  
>
>-Ron

again with the impudent arrogant disrespect, shame on you.  His name is
either "William", William Walsh", or even "Mr. Walsh".  Does your disregard
for common courtesy  infer that we should simply address you as "Wiener"?
Let's not degrade this discussion any further with this kind of nonsense, ok?
==========================

Now, Ron, please answer this:

Q: you registered ~23,500 names in 2001 True/False?

Q: you had ~$3M in revenues in 2001  True/False?

The "majority" of SnapBacks miraculously "ripen" within 60 days.  You have
made this statement repeatedly, so I will not ask you True/False.

Q: Since you have not offered the shorter 12 month SnapBack subscription
for anywhere close to a year, you cannot supply us with empirical data to
support an answer to the question that many of us really want to know - How
many SnapBacks go to term and expire without ever providing the subscriber
with a name?  This group would likely be largely made up of all of your
precious "Jills" and "mainstream consumers" and not "domain speculators",
and do not give me the "IP Community" BS here, please.
Basically, How many people end up with nothing to show for thier money?

Q: Simple math, assuming the above figures are in line, shows us that even
at the higher SnapBack cost of $49, the names registered in 2001 can only
account for less than $1.2M  I doubt that you can tell us with a straight
face that you really sold ~$1.8M worth of "SnapShot" subscriptions, did you?

That leaves us with well over 50% of all SnapBack subscriptions sold last
year unfulfilled. Yet you claim that "the majority" ripen in the first 60 days?

I have no reason to believe that, if WLS were to be put in place,  the
percentage of unfulfilled subscriptions would change by much.  This would
mean, at a 5% level (as you have suggested) that over 700,000 people may
simply be "throwing thier money away". Call me old fashioned, but to me
this seems wrong to even contemplate offering such a thing to the public.
I have seen concerns about this type of thing brought up by many different
registrars, always with no response from SnapNames or VGRS to assure us
that anything would prevent this.  I see it as becoming the majority of the
WLS subscriptions, if implemented as proposed, due to FUD.  This concerns
me, as a consumer, to think that the Registrar business will now be forced
to sell a product to unsuspecting "main stream" consumers that has a likely
chance of providing those same consumers with absolutely no performance for
thier money.  Does the Registrar Industry need more "Black Clouds" of
unscrupulous behavior hanging over it?  Oh, I forgot... It is for the
Public good because it "fights" the "abusive speculators".  Personally, I
see this whole proposal as Predatory itself.

Q: What is the Patent Pending on your "technology"?  Where is it filed?

Q: Were VeriSign to implement some similar process by themselves, without
SnapNames, since SnapNames would not be able to operate as they are now,
would SnapNames sue VeriSign?  If so, what would this suit be for, patent
infringement or Anti Trust violations?  I expect no answer to this question.

Harold Whiting
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:31:26 -0800 (PST)
From: George Kirikos <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Re[5]: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs.    Benefit  s of the  Few

Hello,

- --- Ron Wiener <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Perhaps you can specifically state what data you wish to see, and why
> you
> wish to see it, that we have not already provided.  
> 
> Yes, your definition of holding = active subscriptions.  I presumed
> you
> wanted the most current data available.  If what you really want is
> historical data that is older, request it, and provide a reason why
> you
> think it's even relevant.  

I've not requested any data, as it's already been fully analyzed via
the public (and verifiable) Hot 100 list. I was just responding to the
dismissal of William's concerns, when the data you have chosen to
disclose is spin.
 
> Your question regarding "abusive speculation" was answered IN FULL by
> Cameron earlier this evening.  I'm attaching the e-mail as you've
> apparently
> missed it. 

Cameron's email was filtered out by the DNSO GA mailing list as junk,
as he is not subscribed. Thank you for providing it.

Cameron writes:
 
> Mr. Page is in error in alleging that we have ever stated that the
> growth in
> our revenues will be "a direct result of the new WLS arrangement with
> VeriSign."  Mr. Page is apparently reading press reports, but not, as
> he may
> be implying, press releases by SnapNames itself.  SnapNames has never
> claimed that its annual revenues would increase from $3 to $20
> million "as a
> direct result of the new WLS arrangement with VeriSign" because it is
> not
> true;

I find it very odd that SnapNames suggests these people are "in error"
and misquoting SnapNames, when they produce the same numbers
repeatedly. I point out that 

http://portland.bcentral.com/portland/stories/2001/12/31/daily37.html

says "The deal with VeriSign will bring SnapNames more than $20 million
in revenue this year, said Ron Wiener, CEO of SnapNames. "This is a
huge deal," he said, "a five-year exclusive licensing agreement. We
consider it will have a total value of $100 million to $150 million
over the term of the contract." In 2001, SnapNames took in $2.98
million in revenue".

Are these the same press that are falsely reporting that SnapNames
caters mostly to ma and pa registrants, when the majority of business
really comes from "speculators"?

> Second, while I'm not sure it was we who used the term "abusive
> speculator"
> (I note that we did recently quote Bruce Tonkin of MelbourneIT on the
> subject), and while we are under no obligation to respond to your
> interrogations, I'll point out for the other members of the list that
> we
> have, in fact, discussed repeatedly what might be termed "abusive"
> tactics
> of speculators.  Pages 16-17 of the October "State of the Domain"
> list
> several, from intentional credit card fraud to abuse of the 5-day
> grace
> period.  See
> http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainOct2001.pdf.

I read it -- I don't see any of your competitors who qualify as abusive
speculators by those definitions. Going after Canary.com or Beijing.com
or Cheerleaders.com weren't cases of "credit card fraud" or "abuse of
the 5 day grace period". 

> Page 20 of the August edition further discusses a distinction between
> speculators who have superior foresight in being the first to
> register a
> name, versus speculators who have superior access to other customers
> due to
> their preferential treatment by registrars -- a state of affairs into
> which
> we would invite congressional oversight.  See
> http://www.snapnames.com/downloads/StateoftheDomainAug2001.pdf.  We
> have

Isn't this "preferential treatment by registrars" something that
SnapNames itself is paying for, through its registrar connection
partners? I suppose any registrar with a different business model is a
black sheep under your definition, even though technically they are
running the identical registration processes as SnapNames? Is eNom
doing anything illegal? Is Dotster? Is Parava? IARegistry? AWRegistry?
Is NameScout? Inquiring minds want to know!

Sincerely,

George Kirikos
http://www.kirikos.com/

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2002 23:34:58 -0800
From: Ron Wiener <[email-masked]>
Subject: [ga] RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits of the  Few

This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19E60.4CFA0FB0
Content-Type: text/plain

Paul,
 
I've responded below to any new questions, but not repeated answers where
they have already been given before, in the interest of everyone's time.
 
- -----Original Message-----
From: Paul Stahura [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 6:10 PM
To: Ron Wiener; [email-masked]'; [email-masked]'
Subject: RE: [icann-delete] WLS Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits of the
Few
 
Ron,
 
Also, thanks for the stats, but the real informative stats would be
what percent of SnapBack ripen in the first month.  That is the 
stat that will tell us all how many of your customers are mainstream users,
not the stats you gave.
 
>> Before I post any further confidential company data to a public listserv,
Paul, I'd like to see you provide evidence of some of your business model
claims.  Including:
- -     How many registrars' connections does eNom control besides it own?
- -     How many club drop members are there?
- -     How many connections does each member get to utilize?
- -     How many names does each member get, on average, for their $2500
monthly fee?
- -     What percentage of the club drop members are speculators?
- -     What percentage of the club drop members' target names are beyond
expiration? Beyond delete command?
- -     What will happen to club drop members' performance expectations when
V-Registrar stops deleting in batches?
 
2)  I think you are flat-out wrong in your characterization of the registrar
conference call.
Nice attempt at spinning it as much as you can toward WLS, though.
Please note that there was not one single registrar who
voted "for" the WLS service.  None. 
 
>> They were not given the option of voting for "yes, with modifications"
but rather railroaded to vote for either "yes, as is" or "no, as is" or
"abstain."  BTW, you can't claim V-Registrar as both voting against the
proposal (which they did not) and being obviously for it because of some
conspiracy theory advantage they would have.  Pick one.
 
Some said that under no
circumstances would they offer WLS to their customers.
 
>> True.  Four registrars who did not disclose having a vested self-interest
in maintaining the status quo voted in this manner.  Out of 96.  75 haven't
even spoken on it as yet.
 
I could tell by their voices and words that they are outraged not just about
WLS and it effect on competition, but about the "its already done" press
releases.  
 
>> Our press releases clearly stated the fact that the system is proposed,
not enacted.  We can't control editors.  We can't control registrars
spreading misinformation to the press.
 
And those who vote "no to WLS" do not have an interest in maintaining
the status quo, as you say they do.  
 
>> Going by the votes in the distributed notes, this is not true.
 
Since Montevideo (or for that matter, ever), I have not heard 
any registrar say they support WLS.  
 
>> WLS wasn't even announced until Dec 30th.  I agree completely Paul -
between Sept 7th and Dec 30th no registrar ever said they'd support the WLS.
Because they never heard of it.

 
regarding WLS on registrant's own names....
I recommend, that if WLS is implemented, and I do not
recommend that it is, that registrants be prohibited from
getting WLS on their own name since there is no purpose
to it. I think Rick is saying that without this, these mainstream
users will be duped into paying the exorbitant fee for nothing.
 
>> Enough with this red herring "duping" issue.  Are you seriously
suggesting that some registrars would stoop so low as to "dupe" unwitting
customers into buying a WLS subscription on their own name?  I'm sorry, I
don't buy it.  

regarding load...
I was surprised to hear you and Chuck say that
WLS is not intended to solve the load problem.  
 
>> WLS was *never* put forth as a solution for the load problem.  There have
been many other good suggestions for dealing with the load problem, but they
are in no way related to the merits of the WLS.  The WLS should have a
positive impact on preventing *further* degradation as more registrars
continue to get into the secondary name marketplace, can't possibly have a
negative impact (as other proposed methods do), but was never proposed as
the solution to this problem.  
 
This means that we all agree that someone will have to implement
another method to fix *that* (the load) problem.  Also, if WLS is not
intended
to solve the load problem, what problem is it solving?
 
>> As primary domain name sales continue to decline many registrars are
minding their bottom line and seeking new products to offer to their
customers.  The secondary market is obviously lucrative or there wouldn't be
such intense infighting over it.  WLS allows ALL registrars, not just a
select few, to participate in the secondary market as a vital new revenue
source, without impacting the registry *further*.  The WLS solves a very
long-standing problem that mainstream customers have had, that they are
willing to pay registrars to solve for them, and WLS addresses that better
than any other proposal.   

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19E60.4CFA0FB0
Content-Type: text/html
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<html xmlns:o=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" =
xmlns:w=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" =
xmlns:st1=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" =
xmlns=3D"http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">

<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; =
charset=3Dus-ascii">

<meta name=3DProgId content=3DWord.Document>
<meta name=3DGenerator content=3D"Microsoft Word 10">
<meta name=3DOriginator content=3D"Microsoft Word 10">
<link rel=3DFile-List href=3D"cid:[email-masked]">
<title>Message</title>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"time"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"City"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"place"/>
<o:SmartTagType =
namespaceuri=3D"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags"
 name=3D"date"/>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
  <o:DoNotRelyOnCSS/>
 </o:OfficeDocumentSettings>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
 <w:WordDocument>
  <w:Zoom>95</w:Zoom>
  <w:SpellingState>Clean</w:SpellingState>
  <w:GrammarState>Clean</w:GrammarState>
  <w:DocumentKind>DocumentEmail</w:DocumentKind>
  <w:EnvelopeVis/>
  <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
 </w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]>
<style>
st1\:*{behavior:url(#default#ieooui) }
</style>
<![endif]-->
<style>
<!--
 /* Font Definitions */
 @font-face
	{font-family:Wingdings;
	panose-1:5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;
	mso-font-charset:2;
	mso-generic-font-family:auto;
	mso-font-pitch:variable;
	mso-font-signature:0 268435456 0 0 -2147483648 0;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
	mso-font-charset:0;
	mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
	mso-font-pitch:variable;
	mso-font-signature:553679495 -2147483648 8 0 66047 0;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Verdana;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;
	mso-font-charset:0;
	mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
	mso-font-pitch:variable;
	mso-font-signature:536871559 0 0 0 415 0;}
 /* Style Definitions */
 p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{mso-style-parent:"";
	margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";
	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;
	text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;
	text-underline:single;}
p
	{mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
	margin-right:0in;
	mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
	margin-left:0in;
	mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";
	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	mso-style-noshow:yes;
	mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
	mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:Verdana;
	mso-ascii-font-family:Verdana;
	mso-hansi-font-family:Verdana;
	color:windowtext;
	mso-text-animation:none;
	font-weight:normal;
	font-style:normal;
	text-decoration:none;
	text-underline:none;
	text-decoration:none;
	text-line-through:none;}
span.EmailStyle19
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	mso-style-noshow:yes;
	mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt;
	mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:Verdana;
	mso-ascii-font-family:Verdana;
	mso-hansi-font-family:Verdana;
	color:blue;
	font-weight:normal;
	font-style:normal;
	text-decoration:none;
	text-underline:none;
	text-decoration:none;
	text-line-through:none;}
span.GramE
	{mso-style-name:"";
	mso-gram-e:yes;}
@page Section1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;
	mso-header-margin:.5in;
	mso-footer-margin:.5in;
	mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
	{page:Section1;}
 /* List Definitions */
 @list l0
	{mso-list-id:1751543378;
	mso-list-type:hybrid;
	mso-list-template-ids:498100828 -765973600 67698691 67698693 67698689 =
67698691 67698693 67698689 67698691 67698693;}
@list l0:level1
	{mso-level-start-at:0;
	mso-level-number-format:bullet;
	mso-level-text:-;
	mso-level-tab-stop:.5in;
	mso-level-number-position:left;
	text-indent:-.25in;
	font-family:Verdana;
	mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";
	mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;}
ol
	{margin-bottom:0in;}
ul
	{margin-bottom:0in;}
- -->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
 /* Style Definitions */=20
 table.MsoNormalTable
	{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
	mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
	mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
	mso-style-noshow:yes;
	mso-style-parent:"";
	mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;
	mso-para-margin:0in;
	mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
	font-size:10.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]-->
</head>

<body lang=3DEN-US link=3Dblue vlink=3Dpurple =
style=3D'tab-interval:.5in'>

<div class=3DSection1>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'>Paul,<o:p></o:p></span></font></p=
>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></=
p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'>I've responded below to any new
questions, but not repeated answers where they have already been given =
before,
in the interest of everyone's time.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></=
p>

<div style=3D'border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in =
0in 4.0pt'>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Tahoma'>-----Original Message-----<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>From:</span></b> Paul Stahura
[mailto:[email-masked]] <br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Sent:</span></b> =
</span></font><st1:date
Month=3D"1" Day=3D"15" Year=3D"2002"><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:
 10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'>Tuesday, January 15, =
2002</span></font></st1:date><font
size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'> </span></font><st1:time
Hour=3D"18" Minute=3D"10"><font size=3D2 face=3DTahoma><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;
 font-family:Tahoma'>6:10 PM</span></font></st1:time><font size=3D2 =
face=3DTahoma><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Tahoma'><br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>To:</span></b> Ron Wiener; =
[email-masked]';
[email-masked]'<br>
<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>Subject:</span></b> RE: =
[icann-delete] WLS
Input - Greatest Good vs. Benefits of the Few</span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Ron,</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Also, thanks for the stats, but =
the real
informative stats would be</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>what percent of SnapBack ripen in =
the
first month.&nbsp; That is the </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>stat that will tell us all how =
many of your
customers are mainstream users,</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>not the stats you =
gave.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t;
Before I post any further confidential company data to a public =
listserv, Paul,
I'd like to see you provide evidence of some of your business model
claims. <span =
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;</span>Including:<o:p></o:p></span></fo=
nt></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>How many registrars' connections does eNom control
besides it own?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>How many club drop members are =
there?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>How many connections does each member get to =
utilize?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>How many names does each member get, on average, for =
their $2500
monthly fee?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>What percentage of the club drop members are =
speculators?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>What percentage of the club drop members' target =
names
are beyond expiration? Beyond delete =
command?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal =
style=3D'margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1;
tab-stops:list .5in'><![if !supportLists]><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DVerdana><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-fareast-font-family:Ve=
rdana;
mso-bidi-font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span =
style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>-<font
size=3D1 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span style=3D'font:7.0pt "Times New =
Roman"'>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;
</span></font></span></span></font><![endif]><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'>What will happen to club drop members' performance
expectations when V-Registrar stops deleting in =
batches?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>2)&nbsp; I think you are flat-out =
wrong in
your characterization of the registrar conference =
call.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Nice attempt at spinning it as =
much as you
can toward WLS, though.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Please note that there was not one =
single
registrar who</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>voted &quot;for&quot; the WLS
service.&nbsp;&nbsp;<span class=3DGramE>None.</span> =
<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t; They
were not given the option of voting for "yes, with modifications"
but rather railroaded to vote for either "yes, as is" or "no,
as is" or "abstain."<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;
</span>BTW, you can't claim V-Registrar as both voting against the
proposal (which they did not) and being obviously for it because of =
some
conspiracy theory advantage they would have.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>Pick =
one.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Some said that under =
no</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>circumstances would they offer WLS =
to
their customers.</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t;
True.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>Four registrars who =
did not
disclose having a vested self-interest in maintaining the status quo =
voted in
this manner.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span><span =
class=3DGramE>Out
of 96.</span><span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>75 haven't =
even
spoken on it as yet.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>I could tell by their voices and
words&nbsp;that they are outraged not just =
about</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>WLS and it effect on =
competition,&nbsp;but
about the &quot;its already done&quot; press releases.&nbsp; =
</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t; Our
press releases clearly stated the fact that the system is <span =
class=3DGramE>proposed,</span>
not enacted.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>We can't =
control
editors.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>We can't control
registrars spreading misinformation to the =
press.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>And those who vote &quot;no to =
WLS&quot;
do not have an interest in maintaining</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>the status quo, as you say they =
do.&nbsp; </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t;
Going by the votes in the distributed notes, this is not =
true.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>Since =
</span></font><st1:City><st1:place><font
  size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
  color:blue'>Montevideo</span></font></st1:place></st1:City><font =
size=3D2
color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:blue'> (or for that matter, ever), I have not heard =
</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>any registrar say they support =
WLS.&nbsp; </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t; WLS
wasn't even announced until Dec 30<sup>th</sup>.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>I agree completely Paul - =
between Sept
7<sup>th</sup> and Dec 30<sup>th</sup> no registrar ever said they'd
support the WLS.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span><span =
class=3DGramE>Because
they never heard of it.</span><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D3 face=3D"Times New Roman"><span =
style=3D'font-size:
12.0pt'>&nbsp;<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>regarding WLS on registrant's own
names....</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>I recommend, that if WLS is =
implemented,
and I do not</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>recommend that it is, that =
registrants be
prohibited from</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>getting WLS on their own name =
since there
is no purpose</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>to it. I think Rick is saying that =
without
this, these mainstream</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><span class=3DGramE><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DArial><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>users</span></fo=
nt></span><font
size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:blue'> will be duped into paying the exorbitant fee for =
nothing.</span></font><font
size=3D2 face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial'><o:p></o:p></span></font></=
p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></=
p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'>&gt;&gt; Enough with this red =
herring "duping"
issue.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>Are you seriously =
suggesting
that some registrars would stoop so low as to "dupe" unwitting
customers into buying a WLS subscription on their own name?<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>I'm sorry, I don't buy =
it.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></=
p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><span class=3DGramE><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue =
face=3DArial><span
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>regarding</span>=
</font></span><font
size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Arial;
color:blue'> load...</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>I was surprised to hear you and =
Chuck say
that</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>WLS is not intended to solve the =
load
problem.&nbsp; </span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t; WLS was
*<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>never</span></b>* put forth as a =
solution
for the load problem.<span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; =
</span>There have
been many other good suggestions for dealing with the load problem, but =
they
are in no way related to the merits of the WLS.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>The WLS should have a positive =
impact on
preventing *<b><span style=3D'font-weight:bold'>further</span></b>* =
degradation
as more registrars continue to get into the secondary name marketplace, =
can't
possibly have a negative impact (as other proposed methods do), but was =
never
proposed as the solution to this problem.<span =
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;
</span><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&=
nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>This means that we all agree that =
someone
will have to implement</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>another method to fix *that* (the
load)&nbsp;problem.&nbsp; Also, if WLS is not =
intended</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'>to solve the load problem, what =
problem is
it solving?</span></font><o:p></o:p></p>

</div>

<div>

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DArial><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:blue'><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></font></p>=

<p class=3DMsoNormal><font size=3D2 color=3Dblue face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;color:blue'>&gt;&g=
t; As
primary domain name sales continue to decline many registrars are =
minding their
bottom line and seeking new products to offer to their customers.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>The secondary market is =
obviously
lucrative or there wouldn't be such intense infighting over it. <span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;</span>WLS allows ALL registrars, not =
just a
select few, to participate in the secondary market as a vital new =
revenue
source, without impacting the registry *<b><span =
style=3D'font-weight:bold'>further</span></b>*.<span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp; </span>The WLS solves a very =
long-standing
problem that mainstream customers have had, that they are willing to =
pay registrars
to solve for them, and WLS addresses that better than any other =
proposal. <span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;</span></span></font><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span =
style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;color:blue'><span
style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>&nbsp;</span></span></font><font size=3D2 =
color=3Dblue
face=3DVerdana><span style=3D'font-size:10.0pt;font-family:Verdana;mso-b=
idi-font-family:
Arial;color:blue'><o:p></o:p></span></font></p>

</div>

</div>

</div>

</body>

</html>

- ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19E60.4CFA0FB0--
- --
This message was passed to you via the [email-masked] list.
Send mail to [email-masked] to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

------------------------------

End of GA-DIGEST V1 #997
************************