RE: [DNS] Why have a policy?

RE: [DNS] Why have a policy?

From: Larry Bloch <larry.bloch§netregistry.com.au>
Date: Fri, 1 Apr 2005 12:34:25 +1000
Exactly.

Registrars in fact feel to a large degree that auDA is overly influenced by
the demand side - there are 6 board members representing the buying public
and only three representing supply. Then there is Chris (lets call his
position neutral for now), and the Chair who does an excellent job of being
neutral to the board composition, which can mean more not on registrars side
than on in practice.

auDA is not run by registrars. It should be - if it was, policy would be
objective and automatic, names would be cheaper and overall a far more
rational and market driven system would pertain. I think that that would
deliver a better result for all - including those that need protection. For
example, I think you would find registrars keen to have a DRP that was
affordable - its in our interests for disputes to be handled efficiently and
cheaply.

Bring on auDA run by supply!

Larry

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Deus Ex Machina [mailto:vicc&#167;cia.com.au] 
> Sent: Thursday, 31 March 2005 7:01
> To: dns&#167;dotau.org
> Subject: Re: [DNS] Why have a policy?
> 
> 
> hi
> 
> I think you need to step back and think anytime
> you have a policy which requires a subjective decision
> you are going to get different people with different opinions 
> about the meaning. 
> 
> we wish auda was driven by registrars :) if you ever attend
> an auda/registrar meeting you could see that it is simply not 
> the case.
> 
> our aim is to try and give customers what they want
> within the context of the policies and provide the best 
> possible service we can.
> 
> Vic
> 
> 
> Bill [ansearchwatch&#167;yahoo.co.uk] wrote:
> > Kim
> > 
> > > It would be nice to get some hard data on things
> > > like number of
> > > complaints, how they are handled, methods of
> > > resolution etc. to make
> > > an informed evaluation of the current system.
> > > Something like a case
> > > database, as you can do with UDRP requests, would
> > > provide relevant
> > > history to both determine the future course of
> > > policy, and find relevant
> > > precedent on how policy is being interpreted.
> > 
> > I agree some degree of transparency would indeed be
> > helpful. From my point of view it seems that auda is
> > driven by the registrars, who's main objective is to
> > sell as many domains as possible. It seems even they
> > are not sure how to interpret policy which generally
> > means leaning towards a sale.
> > 
> > > I would say throwing out unqualified remarks like
> > > that only serves to undermine whatever you're
> > saying.
> > 
> > Yes I apologise
> > 
> > Bill
> > 
> > 
> > Send instant messages to your online friends 
> > http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> > 
> > 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -----
> > List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/
> > Please do not retransmit articles on this list without 
> permission of the 
> > author, further information at the above URL.
> > 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------
> List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/ 
> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without 
> permission of the 
> author, further information at the above URL.
> 
> 
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Apr 27 2015 - 00:00:15 UTC