Re: [ga] RE: Whois more in detail

["kidsearch" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hmmm. I didn't know that was a requirement. When I pay someone I never 
looked to see what the receiver's address and phone number are or even if 
they are there. Does it do that each time you send money through a website 
using paypal?

Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
http://www.articlecontentprovider.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Theresa Taylor" <theresa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "'kidsearch'" <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Roberto Gaetano'" 
<roberto@xxxxxxxxx>; "'Paul Stahura'" <stahura@xxxxxxxx>; "'Jeff Williams'" 
<jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Dominik Filipp'" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
Cc: "'icann whois'" <whois-comments@xxxxxxxxx>; "'ga'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 3:34 PM
Subject: RE: [ga] RE: Whois more in detail


> Paypal does at this time but only if you have a merchant account.
>
> Theresa Taylor
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf 
> Of
> kidsearch
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 9:06 AM
> To: Roberto Gaetano; 'Paul Stahura'; 'Jeff Williams'; 'Dominik Filipp'
> Cc: 'icann whois'; 'ga'
> Subject: Re: [ga] RE: Whois more in detail
>
> Hi Roberto and thanks. I am open to hearing more suggestions about how 
> else
> this can be achieved and think it a proper topic for this list to tackle.
> But for now, the whois would and could be a "quick fix" until a better
> solution is worked out. There are several ways to go about improving trust
> from a consumer perspective and to protect consumers.
>
> 1. PayPal and Credit Card Companies as well as other financial processing
> companies could implement some sort of requirement that in order to use
> their services you must have valid contact info readily available to 
> buyer.
> It could be achieved by making it a part of the signup process for their
> services where the contact info is sent from them to each buyer who buys
> from a particular website. Even after the fact would be better than what 
> we
> have now.
>
> 2. Trust Certificates have so far been ineffective, but maybe they can be
> improved.
>
> 3. Last but not least is the whois.
>
> Any other suggestions or comments on those?
>
> Chris McElroy aka NameCritic
> http://www.articlecontentprovider.com
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Roberto Gaetano" <roberto@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: "'Paul Stahura'" <stahura@xxxxxxxx>; "'kidsearch'"
> <kidsearch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "'Jeff Williams'" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> "'Dominik Filipp'" <dominik.filipp@xxxxxxxx>
> Cc: "'icann whois'" <whois-comments@xxxxxxxxx>; "'ga'" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 7:58 AM
> Subject: RE: [ga] RE: Whois more in detail
>
>
> > Paul Stahura wrote:
> >
> > > not yet, the aren't (domain name registrants), but someday...
> >
> > You raise an interesting point. I have been convinced for years that this
> > was going to happen *eventually*.
> > However, we might wonder what is the timeframe that we are talking about.
> >
> > Also, putting this in context, I would argue that domain name registrants
> > of
> > tomorrow might be more informed than the non-registrant users of today.
> > Today it is easy to fall prey of scammers, and therefore it would not 
> > hurt
> > if the current rules (of today) were more protective of the average
> > inexperieced user than what would be reasonable to have in a mature 
> > market
> > where all actors have some degree of experience.
> >
> > All this to say that I am in favour of some form of control of the
> > commercial use of the internet, in terms of providing to the 
> > inexperienced
> > counterpart some degree of assurance of the trustworthness (sp?) of the
> > commercial operator (I hate to limit the case only to commercial sellers
> > and
> > individual buyers, there is much more going on on the net).
> > WHere I have doubts is whether this should be something built in at a
> > lower
> > level like the WhoIs, versus some self-disciplined effort among content
> > providers.
> >
> > So, today, for the scenario we are in, with a huge mass of inexperienced
> > users, we might need solutions that are different from the solutions we
> > might need in the future, in a more mature situation.
> >
> > (usual disclaimer, this is only my personal opinion)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Roberto