This is sound more and more like socialism, Roger.
On Mon, 2003-02-03 at 15:27, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> > From: Marc Schneiders [mailto:marc@fuchsia.bijt.net]
> > To: Roger B.A. Klorese
> > Cc: discuss-list@opensrs.org
> > Subject: Re: [TLDA-Members] Fwd: BulkRegister partners with New.Net
> >
> > Wait, wait, wait. I have a personal (family) domain in .ORG
> > and I want to keep it. I do not want to be in .NAME. Why?
> >
> > 1. I would have to tell everybody I have a new email address.
> > This would cost me time, money and fuss. 2. A .NAME domain is
> > way more expensive! 3. I want to run my own mailservers.
> > .NAME _forces_ you to use theirs.
>
> 1. OK, fine. Grandfathering is fine.
> 2. Well, that's a problem we need to fix, isn't it? Since I'm
> already on record as believing names should be free except
> for pure administrative cost, that's no surprise.
> 3. Whatever. We were stupid to let that happen in the first place;
> inconsistent policies in non-country TLDs should never have
> been permitted.
>
> > Things might be different if there were several personal TLDs
> > to pick from, say .NAME, .EGO, .PER, .IND, .FAM. I am sure
> > one of them would come up with a more sensible thing than
> > forcing people to use the TLDs mailservers. And the price
> > would go down too.
>
> Choice is a bugaboo. Like "school choice," it is a facile approach to
> what we should be working for -- quality. And an unregulated free
> market never raises quality.
>
> > Another matter is who is going to police all this, and who is
> > going to pay for the policemen and women. The registrants
> > obviously. It is simply impossible to maintain standards of
> > elegibility for domains. NetSol tried that, but had to give
> > it up, remember?
>
> So we're going to have to do our jobs?! Awww.
>
> > What went wrong with laissez-faire capitalism?
>
> When did it ever go right? It failed us in the days of the robber
> barons, and we've learned from that that regulation is necessary.
>
> > Why can't we pick our own monikers? Why must some people force us into
> a
> > taxonomy, which is always too rigid to do justice to life?
>
> Because it's not about what the name-purchaser wants. It's about what
> benefits the whole net, the name-accessers.
>
> > I used to work in a library in my earlier life, classifying
> > books by subject. Most did fit in more than category. Books
> > cannot chose, people can. Why not let them?
>
> Why do you think LoC categories are printed in the books?
>
> > Or is that those who want to control the internet
> > subconsciously feel that the only solid point where they
> > might get some grip on all of us, is the only hierarchical
> > structure of the internet, to wit the DNS?
>
> I'm for totally free content -- in fact, that's what our organization
> exists for, free in the liberty sense as well as free in the no-charge
> sense. But that freedom has to occur within a framework of order.
-- domainwhiz@yahoo.com <domainwhiz@yahoo.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:37 EDT