And what do you consider to be a "reasonable sum"? Television spots for .info on CNBC, CNN etc... Last I checked these media companies didn't give these spots away for free. How about print ads in Wired and a slew of Ziff Davis Publications (PC Mag etc.) I suppose they let you advertise for free as well?!?
So how did they fail in your opinion? If your going spew unfounded statement like that, give us some insight on why you think this way. I've yet to see any "substance' in any of your posts on this tired topic. James -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 5:51 PM To: Ross Wm. Rader; Joe Baptista Cc: adam beecher; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [TLDA-Members] Fwd: BulkRegister partners with New.Net You want substance? I give you only one case: The case of Afilias. There are many points one could raise against Afilias, I only give you one: They were required by contract with ICANN to spend a reasonable sum to promote .info TLD, but they failed to. ICANN reaction: none Is there some dealing behind the scenes? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "adam beecher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, February 02, 2003 5:58 AM Subject: Re: [TLDA-Members] Fwd: BulkRegister partners with New.Net > This is exactly what I was talking about Joe. A whack of unsupported > criticisms that don't have a strong basis in reality. ICANN makes for > a great target, but you should at least try and sling arrows of > substance... > > -rwr > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Joe Baptista" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Ross Wm. Rader" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "adam beecher" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Saturday, February 01, 2003 11:32 PM > Subject: Re: [TLDA-Members] Fwd: BulkRegister partners with New.Net > > > > > > On Sat, 1 Feb 2003, Ross Wm. Rader wrote: > > > > > > Words can't express how angry that statement makes me feel > > > > Elliot. > It's an > > > > insult to the intelligence of your customers. > > > > > > Adam, > > > > > > Can you clarify this a bit? I spent a lot of time dealing with > > > ICANN > matters > > > and therefore soaking up a lot of the criticism that goes its way. > > > I > would > > > personally agree that a good portion of the criticism is warranted > > > to differing degrees, but certainly not the majority and certainly > > > not all > the > > > time. A lot of it comes from those with an axe to grind and even > > > that > which > > > comes from supposedly unbiased sources is just plain wrong. I'd > > > have to > side > > > with Elliot on this one and really don't understand what it is > > > that > raised > > > your ire to the degree that your words convey... > > > > Maybe the fact that icann claims to be open and transparent but in > > fact is > > closed and insular. Everyone knows icanns claims to open and transparent > > are just a marketing jingo which has gotten very stale. > > > > In fact it no longer matter is critisims are warranted or not. > > Icanns reputation is so tarnished they have effectly branded > > themselves as something no one wants. Even if they were to do a 180 > > degree makeover it > > would not help. They damed themselves by showing us a level of hypocracy > > one only expects from governments and politicians - both dirty words > > to many. > > > > Remember the root system is established based on trust, consensus > > and cooperations. This however is a language foreign to icann. > > > > regards > > joe > > > > Joe Baptista - only at www.baptista.god > > > > Pysmatic Network - The start of a unique Internet experience! > > http://pysmatic.ppp/ > > > > > > >
