Hi All, Give Chuck Gomes enough rope and....
What I liked the best was his comment, "Why needlessly worry Registrants.." I love this! In it's own words, Verisign admits WLS would "worry" Registrants. Then goes on to suggest we best not tell them! Also, the part that, "Even SnapNames admits that about half of their SnapBacks are probably from speculators." Does Chuck not get it? It's the OTHER half -- and that's a hugh number of mostly individuals-- who are the very consumers Versign believes are helpless or, in Chucks words, "they hardly have any chance at all." Well, is this not absurd? They have SnapNames -- a very effective tool! Finally, the WLS price should be high so, "it would be less profitable for them [the speculators] and more beneficial for a regular consumer." Is this a joke? Does anyone believe that $30 is going to deter speculation and benefit consumers? Price may raise the threshold for using a WLS optioin, but the only "benefit" is the windfall cash to VSRG. How does that benefit consumers? In VSRG's defense, it has proven overall to that deletions are, "fairly and uniformly" enforced-- so part of what Chuck says is true. But, Chuck is also correct to say -- again in his own words -- "I don't have a clue what is ill defined with regard to deletions." Verisign's expert spokeperson has now confessed that he is indeed clueless that his sister company is withholding hundreds of thousands of names from the public. Or, is that over a million? Best, Loren George Kirikos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello, Last night, a post by Chuck Gomes was put up on the Transfers Task Force mailing list, re: WLS, at: http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00252.html I was going to respond this morning to its misinformation, but Ross Radar did a masterful job at: http://www.dnso.org/clubpublic/nc-transfer/Arc00/msg00255.html The most hilarious paragraph Chuck wrote was: "[Gomes, Chuck] If the above two recommendations are based on the reasoning in this document that has absolutely no documented, objective data as its foundation, then the transfers task force has provided the community with live evidence that the DNSO processes are horribly flawed. I would like to think that ICANN staff can recognize a politically motivated action from one that is objectively based." in response to the recommendations that WLS be rejected. I trust that the ICANN staff can differentiate the words of those who are truly looking out for consumers and competition, and those coming from a self-serving abusive monopolist like Verisign. The only time Verisign notices consumers is when they're running over them. I also found it hilarious that Chuck tried to justify higher prices for WLS as being in the interests of consumers. Verisign would have a lot more credibility talking about benefits to consumers were it not doing so while its hands are constantly in our pockets. In the immortal words of Charlton Heston: "Get your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!" While Verisign was once the 800 pound gorilla, a Mike Tyson of domains that everyone feared, that could push around consumers, other registrars, and even ICANN with impunity to serve its own needs, I'm happy to see that the DNSO is looking to preserve competition through its sound rejection of WLS. The DNSO is reminding Verisign that they serve us, the consumers, and not the other way around. Their monopoly becomes abusive the moment they forget that, and seek to enrich themselves at the expense of all other market participants, as they have attempted with WLS. Just like Mike Tyson, Verisign's time has passed, as new agile competitors have climbed the ranks, and sophisticated consumers no longer believe the paternalistic "father knows best" routine emanating from Virginia. Instead of offering us real values and innovation through its offerings, a win-win scenario, Verisign has been revealed "in the ring" to have limited skills, and has taken a pounding before ultimately being knocked out. With apologies to the ladies, Chuck's latest post shows to me that Verisign hits like a girl, with no force or credibility behind its arguments. The only question that remains is whether Verisign will say "no mas", while we dance around the ring showing them the bolo punches, or instead whether they will wait for "Lennox Lewis" at the ICANN meeting to show them their final destiny. Sincerely, George Kirikos http://www.kirikos.com/ __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com
