RE: [ga] domain tasting comments

[jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Dominik and all,

  If a registrar or registry is not taking active
and definitive measures to eliminate Tasting,
than it is operating in a largely dishonest manner,
and doing so knowingly.  As to why, I can only speculate
that the reason has more to do about registration fees
than anything else.  

  Additionally, if ICANN itself, meaning the ICANN staff
and Bod are not taking definitive steps to eliminate
Tasting, than it is at least complicit in Tasting activity,
or is so understaffed it cannot function in the best
public interest that can and should already been achieved.
As to why they are not taking effective and definitive steps
is again likely largely more to do about fees it receives from
registrars and registries than anything else.  

  As such, and if I am correct, it would be largely
evident that ICANN is not performing in the best possible
public interests, nor is it acting as you indicate, in the
best or ethical commercial interest either.  From where
I sit, that's largely irresponsible leadership and at least
a violation of the MOU, if not in fact, in sprit.  Such
is not exceptable by any measure I am aware of.  From what
we have all witnessed, it should be clear that I am
unfortunately an sadly correct.  FWIW, I wish I wasn't
correct! >:(

-----Original Message-----
>From: Dominik Filipp <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Mar 29, 2008 5:09 AM
>To: domain-tasting-motion@xxxxxxxxx
>Cc: GA <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Roberto Gaetano <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: RE: [ga] domain tasting comments
>
>
>Jeff,
>
>No, my thought does not at all imply all registrars/registries are
>frauds. It implies that a system loophole that allows for abuse and is
>clearly identified should be eliminated and not replaced with norms that
>inherently can never be as effective as systemic amendment.
>In case of tasting the situation when just few dishonest registrars
>getting away with continuing and profiting from the practice can lead to
>loss of overall trust towards registrars and the registration process
>itself. What is even much worse is that domain tasting, if not
>definitely stopped, brings acceptable precedent disadvantaging honest
>registrars in seeking additional revenue from it. As a consequence, the
>honest registrars might feel offended by not participating on dishonest
>practice. Do you see that dangerous paradox?
>
>Dominik
>
>
>>> Better would be to monitor
>>> deletes and if they rise above a certain level of a considered norm, 
>>> revoke or suspend that registrars/registries Accreditation. If such 
>>> levels are reached or exceeded more than three times in any given 6 
>>> month period, revoke that registrars and/or registries Accreditation 
>>> perminantly and temporarly reassign those functions to whatever 
>>> existing registrar/registry or other qualified entity that is 
>>> interested in managing same properly and ethically.
>>> OR, require and verify modifications to the registration software 
>>> that prevents Tasting as I have already suggested.
>>
>>Disagree. None human oversight based on plethora of unclear bylaws 
>>vulnerable to being neglected or abused can replace inherent systemic 
>>element principally avoiding fraudulent activity. If such exists, of 
>>course. Fortunately, domain tasting is the case.
>>The oversight should be necessary if there is no other way to ensure it
>
>>in such fundamental way. Unfortunately, as in most situations in real 
>>life.
>
>  This response of yours is assuming that all registrars and/or
>registries as well as registrants are frauds.  That is certainly NOT the
>case.  Ergo, oversight need not be verbose as you seem to suggest.  We
>should not act our of fear of paranoia, but rather out of simple logic
>and known historic experiance.
>
>Regards,
>
>Jeffrey A. Williams
>
>>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!) 
>>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>>   Abraham Lincoln
>>
>>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is 
>>very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>>
>>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; 
>>liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947] 
>>===============================================================
>>Updated 1/26/04
>>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
>div.
>>of
>>Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail 
>>jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Phone: 214-244-4827
>>
>Regards,
>
>Jeffrey A. Williams
>Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 277k members/stakeholders strong!)
>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
>   Abraham Lincoln
>
>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
>often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt
>
>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
>liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
>United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
>===============================================================
>Updated 1/26/04
>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS. div.
>of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
>ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
>jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Phone: 214-244-4827
>