The last few times I registered a domain with NetSol, payment was required immediately. Not at all like the old days when months would go by before you really had to caugh up the money; or when they had no idea if a domain was paid or not.
Even if they "held" a domain, until paid, many folks wouldn't gripe if everyone could do this. However, their own poor business practices are their own fault. Their accounting practices are a mess and corporately they don't have a clue what they're doing - that is the real reason it was opened up to other Registrars. Knowing folks who've worked there, it's no wonder they lost their monopoly hold.
Bill C.
--- Swerve <shwa@swerve.com>
> wrote:
>Oh, perhaps i didn't read it clearly, i thought Netsol was just referring to
>names that were registered without payment. If its for names that are about
>to expire, then this is, imo, abuse of their power.
>
>Josh M.
>
>> From: ross <rmueller@UU.NET>
>> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 16:05:54 -0400 (EDT)
>> To: "Derek J. Balling" <dredd@megacity.org>
>> Cc: Swerve <shwa@swerve.com>, Marc Schneiders <marc@venster.nl>, Dale Jung
>> <datapulse@cfl.rr.com>, discuss-list@opensrs.org
>> Subject: Re: Netsol Changes
>>
>> yes, that is my main issue with it......
>>
>> ...ross
>> 0x75,0x75,0x6e,0x65,0x74
>>
>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Derek J. Balling wrote:
>>
>>> I think (somebody tell me where I'm wrong):
>>>
>>> Nobody has a problem with NetSol auctioning off domains they got "stiffed
>>> on" (e.g., someone reg'ed it and did not pay for it), since NetSol has paid
>>> the $6/domain-year and it's "theirs" for that timeframe unless they find
>>> another buyer for it.
>>>
>>> Everybody has a problem with NetSol auctioning off EXPIRED domains that
>>> just never got renewed by their domain-holders, because by doing so they
>>> keep a "free" domain off the market where other (potentially non-NetSol)
>>> people could get it.
>>>
>>> Correct?
>>>
>>> D
>>>
>>> At 02:42 PM 6/22/00 -0400, ross wrote:
>>>> they are on the hook for the 6$, they have the ability to drop it BEFORE
>>>> they ever have to pay the 6$ (exact expiration date) instead of
>>>> giving the owner a window of time to re-register.....
>>>>
>>>> this just forces people to register with netsol instead of the other
>>>> registrars.....
>>>>
>>>> i don't know the right answers, i just don't feel what they are doing is
>>>> right ;)
>>>>
>>>> ..ross
>>>> 0x75,0x75,0x6e,0x65,0x74
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Swerve wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Please don't all jump on me,
>>>>> but its still not clear to me why NSI is behaving poorly.
>>>>> Are they not on the hook for the $6. fee for the domain that's not paid
>>>> for,
>>>>> cause if they are, don't they have a right to hold that domain, and then
>>>>> repo it if its not paid for? Please enlighten me.
>>>>>
>>>>> <duck>
>>>>>
>>>>> josh m
>>>>>
>>>>>> From: ross <rmueller@uu.net>
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2000 13:21:56 -0400 (EDT)
>>>>>> To: Marc Schneiders <marc@venster.nl>
>>>>>> Cc: Dale Jung <datapulse@cfl.rr.com>, discuss-list@opensrs.org
>>>>>> Subject: Re: Netsol Changes
>>>>>>
>>>>>> voice your opinion to ICANN!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ...ross
>>>>>> 0x75,0x75,0x6e,0x65,0x74
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Marc Schneiders wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2000, Dale Jung wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I got this email from a friend who got it from netsol. It basically
>>>> states
>>>>>>>> that unpaid domains in the netsol system will now be put up for
>>>> auction. So
>>>>>>>> that means any domain within netsol system cannot get out without
>>>> being paid
>>>>>>>> in full first. Here's a copy of the email. I don't know the
>>>> ramifications of
>>>>>>>> this but I thought it was interesting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a joke, right? What shall we do? Complain to ICANN very
>>>> loudly or
>>>>>>> burn down NetSol?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Marc Schneiders
>>>>>>> Venster.NL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
_____________________________________________________________
Get Your Free Email at http://www.totalmail.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:35:39 EDT