Kent and all,
Kent Crispin wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 03, 1999 at 08:28:19AM -0500, John B. Reynolds wrote:
> > Kevin J. Connolly wrote:
> > > aspect of the process, I believe that the cluster identified by
> > > the phrase ?Individual Domain Name Holders' should be specified
> > > on the nature of the domain name registrant, not that of any of
> > > the contacts found in the associated records.
> >
> > This is exactly the point I was trying to make on Tuesday. Allowing in
> > those who are associated with domains not held in their own names could open
> > the IDNO up for capture. Others have made convincing arguments for letting
> > in sole proprietorships (liability issues, anti-personal domain rules in
> > some TLDs), but I believe that is far as the exceptions should go.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yet furthermore, your requirement is no guarantee whatsoever against
> capture -- a corporation could register thousands of domains for its
> employees regardless. The presence or absense of Bill Gates in the
> IDNO is immaterial, if microsoft registers domains for its
> employees.
>
> More fundamentally, there is *no guarantee possible* against capture.
> The problem of capture is a purely a function of the small *actual*
> size of the electorate vs the very large *potential* size of the
> electorate. To put it another way, Joop's group of 100 people
> signed up for his IDNO has ALREADY CAPTURED IT.
This statement of Kents is of course absurd. However it does
necessarily follow his normal diatribe...
>
>
> --
> Kent Crispin "Do good, and you'll be
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] lonesome." -- Mark Twain
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number: 972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208
