Re: [DNS] Why have a policy?

Re: [DNS] Why have a policy?

From: <magic2147§>
Date: Sun, 03 Apr 2005 17:26:14 +1000
On 2 Apr 2005 at 8:33, Bennett Oprysa wrote:

> Still upset you were not able to steal someone else's domain I see. It's
> also obvious you still lack the ability to understand plain English...
> There is NO manual or human checking of transfers or renewals, they are
> automated. The registrant warrants that they are still eligible, that's all.
> In that particular case, the domain was deleted because of a false warranty,
> after you complained about it, but unfortunately for you, the people who
> previously had the domain were able to re-register it under a valid entity
> before you.

If the the above qualifies as "plain English" I am a Dutchman.

You say that the domain was allowed to be transferred because of a false warranty  which 
was the case. But at the time you told both me and auDA that the transfer had been allowed 
through your non-human checks because of a error in the system that only looked at a 
registrant's business registration details and not whether it was deregistered. At the time you 
suggested that the error had been rectified.

The fact that the people who provided you with the original false warranty were able to 
subsequently reregister the domain through Enetica probably says more for the efficiency of 
your Domain Sentry product than for the validity of even the current registration. (As a 
sidebar I note that the domain is currently used to purvey a "domain registration" service 
which at $25 a pop for what is, in actual fact, a subdomain is errr.... enterprising.)

Perhaps you can explain how subsequent to your representations more than two years ago 
that all new registrations were meticulously checked by humans your superlative systems 
came to allow the registration of

At the same time could you also please tell me in your plainest English how attempting to 
secure a domain (which should have been cancelled weeks earlier by Melbourne IT had they 
applied the policy rules properly) for a client who would have used the domain in the course 
of their business amounts to stealing - which I am sure even you would understand is a 
serious allegation. Do you have anything to back up your scurillous suggestion?

Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:08 UTC