seem to have an issue with issuing address.
cb
--
--- Begin Message ---
So where does this guy - Paul Twomey - stand now? He seems to still be
on the board of ICANN. I certainly do have the ability to go off the
deep end, but what the hell has this guy ever done for the rest of us?
Seeing as i've emailed it to him , blogged it, and not provided a single
one of you with any useful form of advice in the last 6 months (I do
have some), I post it here for all posterity. Judge me for that if you
choose. He's not going to respond, so the rest of you are welcome. But I
have emailed and telephoned Paul Twomey repeatedly for the last few
years and he doesn't do sh!t for me, even though I have family (read
government) connections.
I call HIM. I'm not the president of ICANN. HE is.
I do realise that I have better things to worry about, as you do, as he
does, but on the other hand it's an Australian that has presided over a
new form of f#cking the the domain system up for the last five years.
And he should be held accountable for his complete lack of achievements.
And his legacy: what A MESS.
I'd welcome you to nominate any positive successes on the part of Paul
Twomey. I'd also welcome you to comment on what an un-regulated mess the
whole TLD situation has become. We used to be able to rely on suppliers,
now we need to employ researchers. In fact, we need to employ lawyers.
I know that the quoted email below is tedious, vindictive, colloquial
and quotational. Even nonsensical. But to be honest with you, I am so
sick and tired of all the bullsh!t artists, whether they're a bunch of
brothers in Perth asking my clients to pay $200 for a domain that
doesn't exist, or an Australian in Washington, getting paid $2,000,000
for a policy that doesn't exist.
So just skip to the point and criticise me for my argument that Twomey
has been an ineffective CEO of the source of everything Internet.
I'm not pretending to be that - he is.
I'll summarise my argument thus:
- domain locking leads to anti-competitive practices: it is, if
anything, a symptom of, or reaction to poor management and policy;
- domain tasting, camping, whatever you choose to call it, is a result
of poor policy and a very public display of a complete misunderstanding
of the domain market by its managers.
The market dictates that erroneously-registered domains are dispensable,
as opposed to the domains that this five-day policy allows to be hijacked.
Paul - list your policies. Do you even subscribe to this list?
If you call yourself an Australian then one of your drones should post a
response quoting on thread. Wouldn't that be impressive. On the other
hand Paul, if you can't even get a proxy to reply, then you only serve
to substantiate my arguments.
Can't believe I just spent two hours editing this post. Is it really
that important?
cb
--
p.s. go swans
p.p.s. hi vic. hope you and your family are well. say hi to l&c.
--
To: Paul Twomey
Both points I emailed to you previously stand, except perhaps that they
could use some clarification - that you would never bother reading
yourself. Perhaps because of my typos, or perhaps because you simply
don't care.
Chris Bell wrote:
1. why do we have to have registrar-lock to prevent automatic
transfer? it's a markey reaction to BS.
I meant a "market reaction to bullshit"; I suppose that anyone that ever
bothered replying to a couple of emails would be familiar with that typo
and not require me to explain it. On the other hand - you are a
non-entity. A was-been. And you don't care to know if you're still
anything.
You wouldn't be familiar with that type of ab-initio typo because you
still outsource your replies to secretaries and assistants. This was a
policy mistake in the first place - the locking of domains - and the
correction that was implemented by the registrars proved to be even
worse. However, I believe this started before your time. So I'll give
you a break there.
But do you honestly think I'm going to stay up for another 3 hours
before an AFL grand final verifying MY facts? It's YOUR job too. So you
have the right of reply, and I have the right to cut my analysis short.
And you get paid much better than I do for it, so - suck on it. I have
friends to host a BBQ for today on the poultry (no pun intended) $50
that I can afford to spend, whilst YOUR clients are ripping holes in my
pockets and you're not listening to me. And you're ripping millions out
of my community.
We intend to enjoy the AFL grand final, you can just enjoy the
osteoporosis that those falsely earned dollars in your pocket will cause
you by weighing you down whilst my back bends over this keyboard and
screen.
The fact of the matter is that domain-locking simply bypasses the
problem of dom-jacking. It's a pathetic excuse of some form of corporate
insecurity that only affects clever speculators. I've never found a
domain name that I can't jack, and I continually test them with my own
clients - with authorisation of course, not that I would submit the
details to you.
On top of that, domain-locking actually locks a whole bunch of
legitimate clients out of their own market and sends their IP (int.
prop., not net address) off to a secondary market where a bunch of
speculators argue over the trivial amount of dollars that they're
willing to commit to stuff up a legitimate merchant whilst a bunch of
yahoo-auctioneers that you've endorsed enrich themselves using a bunch
of loop-holes that you've personally facilitated.
We should also consider how registrars use domain-locking to their own
advantage, to deal with problem number two:
2. get rid of this 5 day grace period for newly-registered domains;
you've seen how the market reacts to this BS.
You're meant to be a policy man. I mean, after all, our government
appointed you as the head of an ineffective think-tank that yielded no
benefits for our economy. You produced a few very costly thousand-page
reports - so have I. Except for the three zeros added to your price.
Do you think anyone actually reads them? I have, but I've never met a
single other person who has read one of your NOIE reports in this
country. Not a mention. Apart from my father - and the reason he
presented your print copy to me was to ask me for advice. I've been
working in the industry since 1995 - but you're simply not discussed in
this country.
Maybe because you're ineffective? Maybe because you DON'T HAVE A FUCKING
CLUE?
So explain to the rest of us how your "policy" is actually of benefit to
us, let alone the common netizen. Or even what your "policy" is. Have
you got a web site with a list of bullet points that we can read? No?
The user is in Shanghai, in Washington, in Buenos, Moscow, Beijing,
Auckland, or in Sydney. You haven't attracted any sort of media
attention whatsoever in the last five years. Is that a measure of your
ineffectiveness?
As a matter of comparison, Al Gore, who used to dominate your publicity
space very poorly (mainly due to Tipper's negativity), has recently been
incredibly successful in pushing a message that he couldn't even bother
wheeling around in a supermarket trolley seven years ago. Now, that's
good policy. And a good message. And highly marketable.
It makes me so sick that I might just have to attach a CV. Because you
need c&nts like me.
Get your shit together Paul, or just simply f&ck off. If you're just
doing it for the money then your children will have nothing to aspire
to. And wouldn't that be a shame.
It sickens me that you can achieve so little in so much time with so
much money. I really don't understand how a man who gets so much so can
achieve so little - especially with so many open windows.
Go the Swans.
Chris Bell
Blue Sky Host
--
--- End Message ---
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
