Re: [DNS] .au space proposal

Re: [DNS] .au space proposal

From: Deus Ex Machina <vicc§>
Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2000 09:07:59 +1100
Patrick Corliss [patrick&#167;] wrote:

>If the policy is being reviewed, the question becomes "Is
> the present method of allocation (First Come, First Served at a fixed price)
> the fairest system that can be devised".
> It is my opinion that the answer must be "No, it isn't".

and here is the crux of the mistake.  the word "fair" in respect to distribution
of a domain does not and should not import the ultimate use of a domain
in deciding the fairness of the allocation!

the ultimate use misuse or non use of an allocated domain is beyond AUda's
charter. if you are going to start differentialy charging by use for a name
then why not start charging company names and business names  differentially
by useage?

think about it, you go register a business name and they tell you oh thats a great
name we will charge you $10,000 for it because you will detriment society
by its use. !?!?!?!? how can they possibly predict that?

because someone might derive a benefit from a business name or company name or
domain name does not infer that society is any the worse for it. thats
impoverished closed loop thinking, that somehow everyone else is poorer
because someone became wealthier. the tides of economic wealth flow back
into society one way or another.

and specifically the issue of wealth being redistributed is already covered by the
government and its called taxes.

the fear of anyone else getting ahead is the narrow minded australian tall poppy
syndrome rearing its ugly head.

it should be very clear to everyone that the entire issue of fairness in respect
to allocation is distinct to fairness in respect to use and the later is outside the
charter of any body allocating names.

I have no problem with auda ensuring that domains are allocated fairly, but
I have serious issues with auda or its panels if they consider they should stick
their nose into any potential use of a domain when deciding anything.

> (2)    Given that the current restriction are to be relaxed, what would be the
> fairest and most equitable method of allocating the newly-released domain
> names?
> Focus on the second question and I think we all might be able to agree.

what is wrong with the present allocation methodology?
first come, first served, fixed price.

Received on Fri Nov 24 2000 - 06:08:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:04 UTC