RE: [ga] ...a palpable hit

["Roberto Gaetano" <ploki_xyz@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi, Sotiris!

Since you asked, here's my view.
Domain name tasting is by and large a nuisance to internet users. And not 
only to domain name registrants, who might be deprived of broader choice of 
names (names are kept out of the market in the grace period 
registration/deletion game), but also to the plain net surfer who gets 
misled by search engines, landing on sites that were not the ones he/she was 
looking for. As time is money, I would argue that the loss of time by the 
user has an actual monetary value, and on top of that a lot of people pay 
their internet access by the time of connection.
And yes, I agree with Karl, the actual raw cost for the registry is 
substantially lower than the cost charged to registrars.
Anyway, my opinions were known, also because I participated to a public 
debate in Marrakesh on the subject, and I brought exactly these positions, 
that are incidentally the positions of the ALAC.

However, I would take this chance to make another couple of related 
comments.
First of all, personally, I would be inclined to get rid altogether of the 
deletion grace period: this was intended for allowing registrants who 
mistyped the name to revert the transaction, but (again personally) I have 
to observe that in the real world most often than not one pays for his/her 
own mistakes. However, do I remember correctly that the deletion grace 
period was introduced exactly following indication from the community that 
registrants/consumers should be protected? I remember even a discussion 
where the point was made that registrants not normally using ASCII were more 
error-prone than others, so we even had a cultural issue.
Secondly, I have to say that I did not appreciate at all the fact that one 
Director who engaged in dialogue on this list has been vehemently attacked. 
In my experience as Liaison, Veni is among the most available to dialogue 
and to listen to every point of view. Of course, he is entitled to have his 
own opinion, which may differ from the people arguing with him, but that 
does not mean he is not listening. IMHO, it is a mistake for the GA to burn 
out the relationship with people like him: it only reduces further the 
chance to be listened.

Cheers,
Roberto

> From: sotiris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ga] ...a palpable hit
> Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2006 16:41:06 -0700 (PDT)
>
> Karl Auerbach wrote:
>
> > In particular I'd certainly be interested in your position on the fact
> > that this
> > "tasting" exercise has demonstrated that the actual registry costs of
> > processing
> > a name registration are significantly less than the registry fee that
> > ICANN
> > requires registrars to pay, and which is passed through to internet 
> users
> > to the
> > tune of several hundred millions of dollars, every year, in excessive
> > registry fees.
> >
> > Question: Do you feel that those of use who acquire names for full term
> > (i.e.
> > one year or more) ought to pay a registry fee (of $6, going to $7+ for
> > .com)
> > even though the actual cost to the registry to process the transaction 
> is
> > on the
> > order of $0.02?  I.e. why should each of us who acquires a full-term
> > domain name
> > be forced to pay an extra %5.98, going to $6.98, especially when the
> > tasters get
> > it for free?
> >
> > Remember, that when we multiply this excessive fee over the entire set 
> of
> > full-term registrants in .com alone we are talking about an excess fee
> > that
> > amounts to hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
>
> I'd be interested in all the ICANN Directors' views on this particular
> question, but since he's made himself available, how about it Veni?
>
> Geia sou!
>
> Sotiris Sotiropoulos