On Sun, 5 Aug 2001, Robert L Mathews wrote:
> At 8/5/01 5:38 PM, Patrick Greenwell wrote:
>
> >I belive I've said this before in this forum, but just in case:
> >At the bottom nearly every page of the New.net site there is an
> >informational message which explains that names are accessible through
> >partner ISPs and to those who activate their browser.
>
> Well, if you're allowed to repeat things you've said before, I guess it's
> my turn:
>
> If you really wanted people to know the truth about new.net, you'd
> mention not just how many people CAN resolve the names, but also how many
> people CAN'T.
I think you've got a stellar career in marketing awaiting you. :-)
> Since most people have no idea how many people are connected to
> the Internet, your "disclosure" number is completely useless.
> For those on this list that aren't sure, there are approximately 450
> million people connected to the Internet worldwide. That means a New.net
> domain works for about 12% of them.
The truth is that no one knows how many people have access to the
Internet.
> Again, I challenge you to put that number on your Web site. Last time
> this came up, you publicly replied that your company would "look into"
> it. Are you still doing so?
I went back through my messages just to be certain I hadn't had a lapse
of memory, and I can't find any statement to that effect. In any case, I'm
really not interested in any "challenge" that involves others deciding for
us what the content of our site should be or how we should market
ourselves.
> You also acknowledged that your domains had limitations, but suggested
> that they were okay for someone who only needed a few friends to access
> his site and didn't care about whether the wider Internet population
> could always access them.
I certainly have said the former, but did not say the latter.
> >We're not burying it in a user agreement which few people ever read, and
> >while I'm certain that there are those that would settle for nothing less
> >than
> >100 point flashing red type at the top of every page as constituting
> >"adequate
> >disclosure" we are very comfortable that people who register names at New.net
> >know what they are getting.
>
> Just shows how much moral standards differ: I'd feel I was ripping off
> innocent consumers with a scam based on misleading advertising, and I'd
> have trouble sleeping at night. Glad to hear you're feeling okay about it.
Robert, I seem to remember that the last thread regarding New.net devolved
into a bunch of name-calling like this as well.
It's unfortunate that some folks out there are so intent on disliking us that
they feel the need to engage in such behaviour, and I'm really not inclined to
continue conversations with individuals that choose to be absuive.
We have at all times been honest about what we are, and what our product
offerings are. We have several of the largest ISPs in the United States
as well as the largest ISP in England that felt that we were honest enough to
do business with and we continue to gain partners, so we must be doing
something right.
Have a great day.
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Patrick Greenwell
Earth is a single point of failure.
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
