At 02:53 PM 5/25/99 -0400, Kim Hubbard wrote:
> >Everyone involved noted how when NSI took over, the quality of service
> >substantially declined.
>
>Wow! you talked to everyone? Did you take an online poll or just called
>everyone up?
Well, Kim, that's constructively toned, to focus on the important part of
Karl's statement, isn't it? Very professional. Thank you.
How about: Over the course of several years, many of us who had continuing
and varied contact with NSI discussed this amongst ourselves and many
others and not one single such discussion uncovered anyone who thought that
NSI was doing a particularly good job in terms of reliability or customer
support?
Some end-users were and are satisfied, yes. However, most people who had a
problem were not satisfied in the resolution process. Anyone with
requirements for continued interactions with NSI was not satisfied.
Now, Kim. Try to respond to the content and try to look inward and find
some professionalism in your skillset. You have a job that is supposed to
require it.
Should you wish to pursue the content of these claims, I am sure that many
of us will be quite happy to document the lengthy and painful history of
dropped entries, double billing, corrupted whois data, and customer service
failings. It went on for years, so there's a very rich base of such
stories, indeed.
> >And are you telling me that NSI went into the contract without knowing
> >what would be involved in doing the job?
>
>Oh, I guess you alone knew the Internet and domain registrations would grow
>at the rate it has. Remind me to call you next time I need a psychic reading.
Yup. It was really tough to see the Internet rate of doubling ever since
its inception and then predicting the next few years.
But, gosh, I guess that is almost attending to the actual content of the
discussion, rather than just attacking personalities. Can't have that, can we?
> >Nobody is making that comparison. Rather, we are pointing out that NSI
> >stepped into a set of well established shoes on a well lit path.
>
>They weren't well established...period. The growth alone would've made
>redesigning the entire system and process necessary.
Then why did NSI wait several years before making serious changes? The
system that NSI operated for its first few years was entirely inadequate
for any real growth. This did not change until after NSI was given its
massive, protected revenue stream.
>You don't have a clue. I guess the facts just don't matter to you when
>it's so much more interesting to make stuff up.
It is, perhaps, significant that you haven't supplied any contrary
facts. Instead you've nicely engaged in character attacks, and other
emotional appeals.
Thank you.
d/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dave Crocker Tel: +1 408 246 8253
Brandenburg Consulting Fax: +1 408 273 6464
675 Spruce Drive <http://www.brandenburg.com>
Sunnyvale, CA 94086 USA <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
