Re: [registrars] submission to House Committee - DRAFT
- To: Elana Broitman <ebroitman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, registrars@xxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [registrars] submission to House Committee - DRAFT
- From: Jim Archer <jarcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2003 18:46:21 -0400
- In-reply-to: <BCAAA5D64C837641A9EBB93E2A50894804F9BAE0@ex2k01.corp.register.com>
- References: <BCAAA5D64C837641A9EBB93E2A50894804F9BAE0@ex2k01.corp.register.c om>
- Reply-to: Jim Archer <jarcher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Some style comments...
Instead of referring to registrants both as registrants and clients, I
suggest "domain owners." They may not know what a registrant is and client
I think puts the wrong message across.
You say "... are not an insignificant burden on the registrar community..."
Why not just say something like "place a significant burden on ..." instead
of employing the double negative? Ditto with the other double negatives
Also, does placing this additional burden upon us cause us to incur
liability if we make a mistake? Should we request language in any
legislation that protects us form litigation which may stem from a small
clerical error on our part? Or from our failure to detect the bad
--On Friday, September 05, 2003 5:42 PM -0400 Elana Broitman
Dear Registrars - I have drafted a potential submission on behalf of the
Constituency to the US Congress Committee that held the hearing yesterday
on Whois accuracy. The goal of this letter is to illustrate for the
Committee the accuracy methods that we already implement and the costs of
doing so, so that they understand that what we do demonstrates our
compliance with the RAA. Please indulge any spelling errors at this
point. I will edit it further before sending the letter to Congress, but
wanted to get it out to you before the weekend.
The hearing record will remain open only through Wednesday, so please
send me your edits by Close of Business Monday, Sept. 8th, so that I can
incorporate them into this draft.
<<Registrants' Whois Accuracy Congress letter.doc>>