Re: [ga] New Registrar Agreement Covers Most Registrations

[Hugh Dierker <hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>]

Danny,
 
I have been mulling this comment.  So I did some random reviews.  The gist of 
what you say is absolutely true.  I think we all knew that, so thank you for 
making it concrete.
 
The sadness of it is that they do a terrible job.  These attempts are not even 
hip, slick and cool by stock offering standards that are plagued by regulatory 
mandatory language.  Some are just outright misrepresentations, that appear to 
be ignorance based, while others are just innacurate. They are not couched in 
translatable marketeeze which we multiculturalist linguistic technicians strive 
for as a baseline. They do not excite (except when the innacuracies are so 
blatant as to excite ones' sense of outrage).  They do not glorify or build 
heroes or slogans.  They ain't got no "Gravitas"!.
 
My anthropological take is that the writers and creators do not and did not 
believe in what they wrote.  There is a total lack of compassion, passion or 
urgency.  On of the most critical factors in writing well is to put blinders on 
to all other reality and lead the charge.  Ho hum, just another day at the 
charity office.

--- On Fri, 11/27/09, Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


From: Danny Younger <dannyyounger@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [ga] New Registrar Agreement Covers Most Registrations
To: "Accountability Headquarters" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Hugh Dierker" 
<hdierker2204@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, November 27, 2009, 6:43 AM



Maybe it's just me, but lately the ICANN Announcements seem as if they've been 
written by a former commissar -- they all seem to have this "it's a glorious 
day, comrades" literary style.

In this particular announcement we aren't told that 35% of accredited 
registrars still haven't signed on to the new RAA agreement -- instead we're 
told that 88% of gTLD registrations are covered.

We aren't told that a Registrant Rights & Responsibilities document doesn't 
actually exist yet; instead we're told that we have new protections.

We aren't told that registrars have put into place a loophole that allows them 
to evade their escrow responsibilities when it comes to proxy registrations; 
instead we're told of "enhanced" data escrow requirements.

We aren't told that registrars rejected almost every single amendment proposed 
by anyone other than their own constituency; instead we're told that registrars 
and the ICANN community successfully collaborated to make sure consumers are 
well protected.

Perhaps just once in a while ICANN could try some honesty.