Re: [ga] domain tastinmg comments

[<chris@xxxxxx>]

I understand the comparisons and the analogy you used about abuse. I'm sure 
the store's policy would change if people were buying thousands of socks, 
creating a shortage, which is exactly what is happening with domain names 
right now.
Chris McElroy


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <chris@xxxxxx>; <domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx>
Cc: "'GA'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 6:37 AM
Subject: RE: [ga] domain tastinmg comments


> Chris,
>
> That allows for any mistakes someone made when filling out the 
> registration
> form. It's simple enough for anyone to understand. It gives the registrant 
> a
> chance to change their mind satisfying buyer's remorse. Show me any policy
> that allows five days for buyer's remorse on an item that usually, with 
> the
> exception of a couple of registrars, costs around $10.
>
>
> IKEA has a policy of 30 days, up to 3 months with the "family Card",
> regardless the amount.
> In Vienna, almost every clothing shop has a week "buyer's remorse" policy.
> That holds also for items that have very low price, under $10, like socks.
>
> There are two differences, though.
> The first one is that you can return the item if you have not used it. In
> simple words, you cannot return used socks.
> The second one, more subtle, is that this policy holds because it is not
> abused. If, for instance, we had the case of few customers buying socks by
> the thousands, creating shortage for the vast majority of other customers,
> returning them a week later, only to re-buy them for another week, I am 
> sure
> that the policy would quickly change.
>
> My tendency would be to make the distinction between fair use, and abuse. 
> I
> know, it is more difficult that eliminating the use altogether, but I 
> think
> it is wiser on the long run.
>
> Cheers,
> Roberto