ICANN/GNSO GNSO Email List Archives

[registrars]

<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [registrars] Re: Ballot to determine whether ICANN Registrars favor or oppose Domain Tasting.

  • Subject: Re: [registrars] Re: Ballot to determine whether ICANN Registrars favor or oppose Domain Tasting.
  • From: Russ Goodwin <russ@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:16:14 -0500
  • Cc: Registrars Constituency <registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys
  • Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=private; d=naugus.com; b=GDFhYof8pqt+ITOW2fmHG+Alk/ABoRnBLBw8ueCaxLXEUxtmiczh9gJreTUGkrUW;
  • In-reply-to: <9396BB4F-FED2-4C07-861E-BAE2425FEB8C@tucows.com>
  • List-id: registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Organization: Naugus Limited, LLC.
  • References: <20080117095547.9924.qmail@qmt.tidewinds.com> <4790F56B.7080309@naugus.com> <9396BB4F-FED2-4C07-861E-BAE2425FEB8C@tucows.com>
  • Reply-to: russ@xxxxxxxxxx
  • Sender: owner-registrars@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031)

Thanks, Ross, Rob, and John, I appreciate all your comments.
@Ross - to clarify: I was simply stating my opinion, not trying to make an argument. I don't feel there are technical grounds for addressing "tasting" nor for eliminating the AGP, therefore I view any action by ICANN on the matter (including initiation of a PDP) as an attempt to regulate the market. 

Rob wrote "We need to tone down the spin and politics, and
start concentrating on what outcome we want."
I couldn't agree more! So here it is with no spin: the outcome my company wants is status quo - no change to the current rules. 

@John - It's my eggplant and my choice, keep your laws off my eggplant.

-Russ
<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>