I may have started a bit of the wild part of this conversation with my rant
about my concerns with Icann.  Personally, i think this is a very important
discussion about whether buying items to sell at a profit is ethical or
harmful.  Whether that item is Nortel stock or a domain name, or even
earning interest at the bank.  Domain name registrars and rsp's have a
responsibility to examine this issue with regards to domain names.  I have
mixed feelings about this issue.  My main beef with the domain name space,
has less to do with people owning many domain names, and more with the man
made  scarcity of domains.

I believe there should be a well administered public system that allows for
virtually unlimited levels of .tld's.    This includes the creation of a tld
that has no .suffix.   Then you could simply type  Legalize  and end up at a
website that was dedicated to the decriminalization of marijuana.

Mind is unlimited.  The internet should reflect that.

  It is a sad day already, when all of us can be faced with lawsuits if we
use Yahoo or Amazon in our domain names.  The public mindSpace is being
threatened.

  So perhaps, if this important thread needs to be continued, we could all
try and present our perspectives without mudSlinging.  I'll try and do that
myself.  

Swerve

> From: "adam" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2000 21:44:17 -0000
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Re[2]: .web, .nom, .shop, ...
> 
> Marc Schneiders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> 
>> Would you be so very kind to enlighten my little brain about the
>> similarities between domain name speculators and spammers, apart from
>> that you both dislike them?
>> 
> The words "unscrupulous" and "unethical" spring immediately to mind. Oh,
> and "immoral" is another one.
> 
> Look, let's drop this conversation Marc et al - you obviously think that
> domain speculation is a good thing, and I think it's bad.
> 
> Neither of us are going to change our opinions, so could we please be mature
> and just discontinue the conversation, before it slides into a flame war?
> 
> Which I think everyone will agree achieves nothing...
> 
> adam the commie
> 
> 

Reply via email to