On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 20:05:02 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>On Fri, Jul 09, 1999 at 02:49:13AM +0000, William X. Walsh wrote:
>> On Thu, 8 Jul 1999 19:47:06 -0700, Kent Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Thu, Jul 08, 1999 at 09:54:49PM -0400, Jay Fenello wrote:
>> >>
>> >> "Shared registries" were not promoted by
>> >> the entrepreneurs that I knew, it was a
>> >> business model promoted by the IAHC!
>> >
>> >Shared registries is also the business model promoted by the White
>> >Paper; and that was the result of the fact that a large majority of
>> >the comments favored it...
>>
>> I don't agree about the "large majority" part, Kent. There was a
>> definite case of ballot stuffing going on with CORE.
>>
>> The White Paper wasn't an election.
>
>It's always so entertaining when you contradict your self like this
>-- Indeed, it wasn't an election. Therefore, the idea that ballot
>stuffing was going on is ludicrous.
>
>In fact it wasn't just the *number* of comments that caused the
>retreat from the Green Paper -- it was their substance. Not only did
>the quantity of comments matter, so did their quality, and who they
>were from, and who was represented by them...
>
>The fact remains, the shared registry model is in the White Paper.
>That's why NSI is going through these contortions -- perhaps you've
>noticed?
NSI is going through these contortions to give the appearance that
this shared model is actually real competition for them. It is vital
to them that this be the impression that it generates.
--
William X. Walsh
General Manager, DSo Internet Services
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fax:(209) 671-7934
"The fact is that domain names are new and have unique
characteristics, and their status under the law is not yet clear."
--Kent Crispin (June 29th, 1999)
