Just to go on record. ANYTHING in the way of actions or product offerings that allows ANYONE to capture an expiring domain without it going through the normal registry delete process is dishonest and WRONG! I say this even though in several instances it would have been to my advantage to have such a system available. Just because it would have helped me, it doesn't make it right.
These types of schemes are exactly why so many of us have been loyal to OpenSRS, we are sick of the way other registrars have abused the system. If OpenSRS (Tucows) decides to dive into the mire with the rest of the slime in the industry it may be time for us resellers to pool our resources and go it on our own instead of feeding the glutenous pigs that permeate the domain registration arena. --Richard On Friday 21 December 2001 09:01 am, Scott Allan wrote: > Just to let you all know - I had popped off the radar last night (today > was supposed to be a day off) but I am on my way in to co-ordinate a few > things, and I will post an update addressing all this in a couple of hours > - so hang in there please! > > sA > Scott Allan > Director, OpenSRS > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > On Fri, 21 Dec 2001, Ross Wm. Rader wrote: > > > According to what I can piece together from > > > the accusations and the vague OpenSRS responses, it looks like OpenSRS > > > believes they have found a "gray area" of the contracts that they think > > > allows them to take ownership of the customer's domain -- the customer > > > I got for them -- and make a profit off it without involving me. > > > > Scott is on vacation, so let me jump in here.... > > > > His team is attempting to put together a service that will allow our > > resellers to offer a product bundle more similar to that offered by other > > industry players. Again, I'll note that I haven't kept completely > > up-to-speed with what Scott and the gang are up to, but from what I have > > seen on this list and gathered around the water-cooler, he/we are > > completely approaching this as a channel product. The rub lies with the > > management platform. Being a wholesaler, technically, isn't a piece of > > cake when it comes to introducing new services (read the exciting new > > novel "Darryl Green's Big Adventure in CertLand" for more details). This > > pilot is very much a "let's try something, see what we break and then fix > > it before we get to the design stage" effort. > > > > My question for all of you is are you opposed to the project because you > > aren't part of the pilot or are you opposed to it because it isn't right > > to do something like this under any circumstances (even when it is > > available to all of our resellers)? Or is it something else? > > Understanding this will really go a long way in allowing us to more > > appropriately interpret what you are all saying to us - sort of the most > > important part of the pilot (getting feedback I mean). > > > > -rwr -- Richard B. Pyne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
