William X Walsh wrote: > > > Mike, I think you crossed a line here. There is currently a lot of > > mud-slinging going on with this topic, probably without foundation. > > No, there is foundation. Tucows may not want to publicly confirm it, > but they are engaging in this practice right now, as we speak. > > And they did it without informing us in advance. I consider that to > be a breach of trust already, one that I am NOT happy about.
I'm willing to give Tucows the benefit of the doubt here. Find me conclusive proof that Tucows has been involved in a definable improprietous act, and I'll join your side. Until then, I'm sorry, but Tucows has not done anything wrong. How do you know that these domains didn't just get 'snapped' up? Do you have documentation showing otherwise? If so, what is it? > I agree. So much so that when I was first told of this, weeks ago > before it ever came up here, I immediately told the person who told me > (who is normally a very good source of info on stuff like this) that > he had to have had his details wrong, and there was no chance it was > as he was presenting it. My defense of OpenSRS was immediate and > without hesitation that they were above this kind of impropriety, > based on the history and the mutual trust they have built with this > channel. Exactly. And I'm still with them on this one -- it seems as though there might just be a bit of slander going on here... > That won't happen again, even if this project is killed. They have > shown they are willing to engage in such improprieties, even if just > until the channel protests too loud. Do you have proof of this, or is it just assumptions? Following what's been said on this list, I see nothing but assumptions based on partial evidence of partial truths. > I do see this as practice as wrong. The customer registers the name > with the understanding of how the process works, and domains are to be > deleted normally. They are not to be put on the auction block after > expiration during a grace period that exists NOT TO BENEFIT the > registrar in having time to sell the name to a third party, but to > provide a period of time to collect the renewal fee from the > REGISTRANT. If registrants were aware that their Registrar was going > to engage in such practices with their domains once they let them > expire, they would probably register with someone else. Why does it matter?!? If they don't want the name, who cares how someone else gets it? REMEMBER: you have the right of first refusal -- the only one you can blame for not making that money yourself is you -- you could have placed the domain up for auction before its renewal date! > I know I would. I wouldn't engage in business with such a registrar, > no matter what other benefits there were. Why, William? How is this harming you? Is it because you think it is Wrong and you are assuming the role of purveyor and judge of all that is Right? > I would either find a registrar who is willing to listen and do things > the right way, or I'd form a group to create our own registrar. > Developing an SRS like system really is not that hard. Really? You've piqued my interest. I've seen so many things in the last year here (which, granted, is only half the time other resellers have been involved with OpenSRS) that show that it is just not a simple as it seems... let me know how you make out on this front. -kb -- Kris Benson ABC Communications +1 (250)612-5270 x14 +1 (888)235-1174 x14
