Re: Melbourne IT's records

Re: Melbourne IT's records

From: Paul Foxworthy <paul§>
Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 11:45:57 +1100
At 11:19 AM 06/03/2001 +1100, Kerry Henry wrote:
>Yep, a good point as well, however, a quick check would identify generics
>already approached on - then allocate these out to those original
>applicants.  For the others then auction to the highest bidder with all
>players fully informed.

You miss the point entirely.

Mary wants a particular name, studies the guidelines carefully, realises 
its not eligible, and applies for a different name.

Months later, Fred thinks of the same name, and through ignorance or 
contrariness applies for it and gets knocked back.

Mary's been diligent and followed the guidelines, Fred has wasted 
everybody's time. And yet you say the record of his application establishes 
some sort of priority? Fred might have cynically tried to push through a 
name he knew would likely fail. Fred may even have done precisely to try 
and establish some sort of priority should the guidelines change.

Mary should have a fair go!



---- Coherent Software ------------- ----
For interactive Web sites, databases, software, animation
Aust. Family History Compendium at
Received on Tue Mar 06 2001 - 08:48:35 UTC

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