[council] re proposed resolution for issues report on deleted names
- To: <council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: [council] re proposed resolution for issues report on deleted names
- From: "Philip Sheppard" <philip.sheppard@xxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2005 09:58:06 +0100
- In-reply-to: <57AD40AED823A7439D25CD09604BFB54A5E7C1@balius.mit>
- Sender: owner-council@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcTzfc7YrnXhsHIhRvizd8NP5CLdhQATNgUQABuWgWAAFzn1cA==
thank you for your clarity in distinguishing between the two issues that are
associated with the draft resolution.
The first, as you say, is the allocation mechanism by which market-savvy
registrars obtain valuable deleted names for re-sale.
The second, is the means by which these are sold to new registrants and the
resulting profit share.
I agree these are two issues.
I am less convinced that the first only is an issue that needs investigating
and that all is well with respect to the second.
I, and I guess fellow Council members, would like to learn more about that
What is the best way we achieve this learning?
I had thought that an issues report might be the mechanism but I am open to