i seem to recall someone following up. would be helpful to set a rough dealine, if one wasn't already mentioned, seeing how important this is to some people.
swerve > From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Organization: Tucows Inc. > Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2002 12:50:11 -0400 > To: "'Mike Allen'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "'discuss-list'" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RE: Letters from Tucpws? > > I was under the impression that Jacqui followed up to my post last week > or so(??) > > > > -rwr > > > > > "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an > idiot." > - Steven Wright > > Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal: > http://www.byte.org/heathrow > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Allen >> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 11:06 AM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; discuss-list >> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >> >> >> Thanks Ross. Just a concern... ;o) Have you heard anything >> else (Decisions) on the referral lists yet? It's been a while >> since you said you were having a meeting about it..... >> >> Mikey >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: "'Mike Allen'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'Derek >> J. Balling'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "'discuss-list'" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 7:39 AM >> Subject: RE: Letters from Tucpws? >> >> >>> I'm going to look into this a bit further to make sure that we have >>> our processes in ship-shape shape...(or something like that)... >>> >>> >>> >>> -rwr >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the >> shore like an >>> idiot." >>> - Steven Wright >>> >>> Please review our ICANN Reform Proposal: >> http://www.byte.org/heathrow >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Mike Allen >>>> Sent: Wednesday, July 31, 2002 8:09 AM >>>> To: Derek J. Balling; discuss-list >>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>> >>>> >>>> Exactly. Thank you. in the period since we have been >>>> established we have not had one support question their. They >>>> all go to our support box. If we ever did run into the >>>> problem of support stuff in the whois box, then we would >>>> contact everyone and remind them again of the procedures....... >>>> >>>> Mikey >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> From: "Derek J. Balling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> To: "Chuck Hatcher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Cc: "Mike Allen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; >>>> "discuss-list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 10:40 PM >>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>> >>>> >>>>> Support requests wouldn't be going to that address. His >> customers >>>>> would be sending to their normal "support" address that >> they have. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, July 30, 2002, at 10:16 PM, Chuck Hatcher wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Look, I don't want to argue about how to run a business. >>>> I'll do it >>>>>> my way, and you do it yours. But I wouldn't call waiting >>>> two days to >>>>>> answer a support request going the "Extra Mile"! >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Mike Allen >>>>>> To: Chuck Hatcher ; discuss-list >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 9:13 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>>>> >>>>>> Exactly, but why eliminate potentially important email, >>>> when you can >>>>>> publish one and sift through it every 2 days and make >>>> sure nothing >>>>>> "Important" is coming your way? Please re-read your last >>>> email. Once >>>>>> again, we are going the "Extra-Mile" that we are not >>>> "Required"???? >>>>>> ;o) >>>>>> >>>>>> Mikey >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Chuck Hatcher >>>>>> To: Mike Allen ; discuss-list >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 7:31 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>>>> >>>>>> Let me make sure I understand - I assume you're >> talking about the >>>>>> reseller contact email address (as opposed to >> technical contact). >>>>>> >>>>>> If you don't want to use email for reseller contact, >> you have the >>>>>> option of having the address not appear in the whois. You >>>> can use a >>>>>> url, or a phone number, or all the above, or nothing. >> My point is >>>>>> that if you DO publish an email address as a means of >>>> contacting you >>>>>> for registration support, you ought to at least skim >> through the >>>>>> messages sent to that address. If you think >> advertising an email >>>>>> address is just going to result in a lot of spam, >> then why do it? >>>>>> >>>>>> Personally, I like listing only the URL, and >> providing a support >>>>>> form on the website. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Mike Allen >>>>>> To: Chuck Hatcher ; discuss-list >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 7:50 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>>>> >>>>>> Come on dude. They are sending email to a public, mostly >>>> trash box. >>>>>> Yes, their e-mail is more important with the 200 emails a >>>> day we get >>>>>> from scum mining the who-is to send us porno offers! >> We scan the >>>>>> trash bin a couple times a week to make sure there is nothing >>>>>> "Important" but we make sure our customers know the >> boxes (Proper >>>>>> procedures) for any issues... Are you telling me you >> have time to >>>>>> sift through 200+ trash emails a day? It is called >>>> organization and >>>>>> I definatly don't need someone telling me how to do >> it as we have >>>>>> things running quite well and I can guarantee know >> one has "Ever" >>>>>> filed a complaint against us. We go the extra mile. >> Why? We don't >>>>>> have trash mail is our way every day! >>>>>> >>>>>> Things run quite well here. Just out of curiosity, how >>>> long have you >>>>>> been a reseller? If over a year, you too would be a fine tuned >>>>>> machine from all the scum and crap on a daily basis........ >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mike Allen, 4CheapDomains.Net >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> http://www.4CheapDomains.Net >>>>>> (812) 275-8425 - Office >>>>>> (815) 364-1278 - Fax >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Chuck Hatcher >>>>>> To: Mike Allen ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 5:44 PM >>>>>> Subject: Re: Letters from Tucpws? >>>>>> >>>>>> Are you saying email from Tucows is more important than >>>> email from >>>>>> your >>>> >>>>>> customers? >>>>>> >>>>>> I hate wading through spam as much as the next guy, >> but I would >>>>>> never filter email sent to a contact address I have >>>> published to the >>>>>> public. (And I can't think of a better way for Tucows to >>>> make sure >>>>>> you keep your "public" address updated than to use it for >>>> critical >>>>>> updates!) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>>>> From: Mike Allen >>>>>> To: discuss-list >>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2002 3:48 PM >>>>>> Subject: Letters from Tucpws? >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>> >>>>>> Hoping Charles (But I think he is on vacation?) might >> shed some >>>>>> light. Should account teams etc announcement e-mails be >>>> sent to the >>>>>> email that we have designated as, let's say >> announcements? I have >>>>>> been receiving email to our address that is listed in the >>>> WHOIS that >>>>>> we filter for spam! I have a bad feeling we will loose a >>>> important >>>>>> message one day if this is not changed.... >>>>>> >>>>>> Maybe we are the only one, but seems odd that SRS sends >>>> us mail to >>>>>> the address that we list in the reseller area as our >>>> WHOIS info.... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Mike Allen, 4CheapDomains.Net >>>>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>>>>> http://www.4CheapDomains.Net >>>>>> (812) 275-8425 - Office >>>>>> (815) 364-1278 - Fax >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >> +------------------------------+--------------------------------+ >>>>> | Derek J. Balling | "You can get more with >> a kind | >>>>> | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | word and a >> two-by-four, than | >>>>> | www.megacity.org/blog/ | you can with just a >> kind | >>>>> | | word." >> - Marcus | >>>>> >> +---------------------------------------------------------------+ >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> >
