Re: [ga] Eliminating the Add Grace Period

[Karl Auerbach <karl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Thomas Barrett - EnCirca wrote:
> Is there anyone out there really concerned about protecting the interests of
> the consumer?
>
> Giving the consumer the option of immediately deleting a name is
> pro-consumer.

Three points of response:

1. If "the consumer" causes a registrar/registry action there are costs 
and somebody has to pay for them.  It is most equitable if those costs 
are paid for by the actor who caused them - the consumer.

2. If we had a realistic accounting of actual costs, I suggest that the 
per-transaction costs would be measured in small multiples of $0.01 (or 
less).

The scam of the 5-day graces is that they seem to be causing a 
substantial shift of those costs from the speculators, who get it for 
free, onto the registrars and registries and in turn of the normal kind 
of consumer.

3. The rule of registrations in 1 year units with an aggregate duration 
of 1 to 10 years, was something that ICANN just did without study, 
without exploration, without any process.  Yet there is an obvious need 
for very long term registrations and very short ones.  I would suggest 
that a substantial part of the costs of our ICANN-imposed system (or as 
Dr. Pangloss would say, the best of all possible systems) is in the 
periodic renewal and re billing.

		--karl--