Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100, 000-plus price tag

[Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>]

I guess some can't have a rational discussion without resorting to name 
calling.  

In the course of time we will have good new TLDs that will serve particular 
needs.  I, for one, look forward to the possibilities offered by a .bank TLD.  
These TLDS will add value to the namespace, and they will be readily found by 
those using common search engine applications.  And yes, we will still have 
some remaining vanity TLDs outside of the root that almost no one will find 
that will continue to offer little to the broader Internet community.  

...and all of this new value in the legacy root will be possible because of an 
agreement to open up the namespace -- something deemed important by many that 
have participated on this list.

I, too, also have concerns... obviously different concerns than Sotiris or 
John... I worry about the rate of TLD introduction and the relative ability to 
manage whatever headaches may crop up.  I see a strong probability of 
registrars gaming the landrush cycle, and I have my doubts about the integrity 
of auction processes that may be used.  






--- On Sat, 6/28/08, sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> From: sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses come with $100,     
> 000-plus price tag
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 7:30 PM
> What a load of crap Danny! Are you bucking for employment at
> ICANN again
> or something?
> 
> Truly a sad day for the Internet indeed.
> 
> Here's an analogy for you: What if your town along with
> your neighbouring
> towns have simply lost confidence in the existing Highway
> or Levee
> authorities because they have been siphoning off the the
> money that was
> intended for maintenance to say... fight pointless wars
> overseas or some
> such nonsense... So, the highway and levee systems around
> your town(s) are
> not what you and your fellow country bumpkins were hoping
> for when you
> paid your taxes like good little sheeple. So, your town and
> its
> neighbouring towns decide to build your own highways and
> levee systems ON
> YOUR OWN PRIVATE LAND. You end up running into many others
> in neighbouring
> towns and cities who feel the same way across the country
> and all together
> and at your own expense you end up setting up your system
> of highways (or
> levees). Then, all of a sudden, the looters at the now
> anachronistic
> Highway/Levee Authority move in and take over your highways
> and levees
> because they have the guns, bombs, and HAARP. How would
> that make you feel
> Mr. Establishment Apologist?
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Sotiris
> 
> >
> > John,
> >
> > I don't see it that way.  Let me try to use an
> analogy.  There are a set
> > of properties that are in a poorly-trafficked side of
> town.  Most folks
> > can't easily find these properties as they are not
> listed in the maps
> > (search engines) that most people will use.  They
> provide some local
> > benefit to those that own the properties and to the
> limited set of
> > neighbors that are aware of the property locations,
> but as they are not
> > situated on the main thoroughfares, most will just
> pass them by without
> > even realizing that they are there.
> >
> > The owners of these properties can arrange to move
> these structures to the
> > main highway by entering into a leasehold arrangement
> with the highway
> > department (the same way that a McDonald's, for
> example, can occupy a
> > prime rest stop location along an interstate thruway).
>  Of course, these
> > property owners may have to compete with other
> property owners to obtain
> > such a lease.
> >
> > And yes, there are times when a major highway might
> pass through a minor
> > property development and create a loss situation for a
> property owner as
> > the highway builders exercise their eminent domain
> rights.  In such cases,
> > there are victims, and often enough such victims are
> not compensated.
> >
> > Anyone that has watched the development plans for this
> highway has known
> > that it has been many years in the making; certainly
> enough time for
> > property owners to make their plans.
> >
> > Most would say:  you can't stop the march of
> progress.  Most would also
> > agree that progress outweighs the needs of the few
> whose assets might be
> > damaged.  Such is life.
> >
> > Those that choose not to get out of the way of a
> steamroller will wind up
> > being crushed -- that's just the way that it is. 
> If you seek to grow your
> > properties, the consider entering into the process set
> up by the highway
> > department.  You have just as much right as anyone
> else to bid on a lease
> > (and ICANN leases are forever).  Put together a
> business plan and field a
> > bid.  It's a better option than grousing over the
> current situation.
> >
> > regards,
> > Danny
> >
> > --- On Sat, 6/28/08, John Palmer
> <jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> From: John Palmer
> <jpalmer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Subject: Re: [ga] New top-level internet addresses
> come with
> >> $100,000-plus price tag
> >> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Date: Saturday, June 28, 2008, 4:27 PM
> >> This is nothing but an attempt at wholesale theft
> of
> >> property from one group
> >> of people (small businesses) by an organization so
> that
> >> they can sell that stolen
> >> property to rich and powerful people. Most of the
> gTLDs
> >> that are popular
> >> are already owned and operated by companies, most
> of them
> >> small businesses
> >> with limited resources. You know how justice works
> in the
> >> country - You get
> >> justice if you can buy it, otherwise, you're
> out of
> >> luck. They are now proposing
> >> to do what they did with .BIZ back in 2000 on a
> wide scale
> >> basis.
> >>
> >> Whats new? ICANN is all about stealing things it
> does not
> >> own and profiting
> >> off of it. We all know, for instance, that the
> UDRP is
> >> nothing but a scheme that allows rich
> >> and powerful interests to steal domains from poor
> people.
> >>
> >> ICANN, Dick Cheney, George Bush, the Bilderburgs,
> >> Hapsburgs, Vladimir
> >> Putin, Robert Mugabe - no difference between any
> of them.
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Dominik Filipp"
> >> <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
> >> To: <sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> >> <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 1:59 PM
> >> Subject: RE: [ga] New top-level internet addresses
> come
> >> with $100,000-plus price tag
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Sotiris,
> >>
> >> bright conclusions as usual, but I see one
> positive aspect
> >> on it, a
> >> decrease of Verisign's .COM dominance. Just
> imagine
> >> perfect URL
> >> addresses such as
> >>
> >> http://microsoft
> >> http://ibm
> >> http://xerox
> >>
> >> affordable for the rich though.
> >>
> >> But all the rest in your post remains perfectly
> valid.
> >>
> >> Dominik
> >>
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
> >> Of sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Sent: Saturday, June 28, 2008 5:03 PM
> >> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Subject: [ga] New top-level internet addresses
> come with
> >> $100,000-plus
> >> price tag
> >>
> >>
> >> All,
> >>
> >> See article:
> >>
> http://technology.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/tech_and_web/article4218629
> >> .ece
> >>
> >> One last money grab by the looters at ICANN and
> their
> >> moocher cronies.
> >> The day of the truly international, standardized
> Internet
> >> is over. This
> >> move is a pretty transparent attempt to dominate
> any DNS
> >> system by a
> >> bunch of shortsighted and pigheaded individuals
> who have
> >> all the
> >> visionary capacity of a rotten potato. The real
> (and
> >> unstated) intent of
> >> this move is to preclude the advent of extra-ICANN
> DNS
> >> systems in any
> >> language on earth, such that the resulting (or
> continuing)
> >> US dominated
> >> addressing system will remain within the purview
> of
> >> American control. In
> >> effect, what ICANN is telling the world is that no
> >> country/nation has
> >> the right to create its own DNS as they will
> simply collide
> >> it into
> >> irrelevancy and make a handsome "profit"
> at the
> >> same time!
> >>
> >> A sad day for Internet users worldwide.
> >>
> >> Sotiris
> >>
> >> P.S. I will be unsubscribing from this list as
> there is no
> >> longer any
> >> reason for me to follow the meaningless blabber
> hereon.
> >> Good luck to all
> >> of you (except to the looters and moochers, I hope
> your
> >> genitalia rot).
> >
> >
> >
> >