RE: [dow1-2tf] RE: WSJ story re Whois and proxy services
- To: "Thomas Roessler" <roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Marilyn Cade" <mcade@xxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [dow1-2tf] RE: WSJ story re Whois and proxy services
- From: "Steven J. Metalitz IIPA" <metalitz@xxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 4 Oct 2004 15:27:24 -0400
- Cc: "Marc Schneiders" <marc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Steven J. Metalitz IIPA" <metalitz@xxxxxxxx>, <dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcSntmzrwxbjs+r3Qi6b26013UHntQCkS0JA
- Thread-topic: [dow1-2tf] RE: WSJ story re Whois and proxy services
Thomas, I think you may have the proportions reversed. The 5% figure
(with the caveats from Paul that this may overstate the proportion of
registrants actually involved) may be indicative of the proportion of
registrants who care enough about the privacy issue to take advantage of
the option currently being offered. This may be reasonably satisfactory
for them, and that would seem to be quite relevant to any further
recommendations that we might make.
From: Thomas Roessler [mailto:roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 8:59 AM
To: Marilyn Cade
Cc: Marc Schneiders; Steven J. Metalitz IIPA; dow1-2tf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [dow1-2tf] RE: WSJ story re Whois and proxy services
On 2004-10-01 07:47:32 -0400, Marilyn Cade wrote:
> As to anonymous services, why are we not intersted in learning more
> about them to see what the satisfaction is with these services?
We do have specific policy proposals on tiered access to discuss.
If we trust the WSJ's numbers, that's an issue that affects the privacy
of about 95% of new registrations (and their registrants).
That should take priority over looking at services that are only used by
5% of registrants, without any particular policy proposals on the table.
Don't you think?
Thomas Roessler * Personal soap box at <http://log.does-not-exist.org/>.