Re: Fw: Re: Shared domains

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Christopher Ambler wrote:
> 
> > I have a sneaking suspicion that the people will after all the smoke has
> > settled decide that they still all want to be in .COM for utterly
> > non-technical reasons, and they still have big problems with the monopoly
> > registry for .COM. Then what?
> 
> The funny part is, I disagree with you, and am putting my money where my
> mouth is. I believe that .WEB can take away a significant chunk of market
> share from NSI, and intend to give it a go. Would you care to make a side
> bet? :-)
> 
> Seriously, why not let the market decide?
> 

How can you let the market decide which is better?  Its impractical. 
.web is a VERY good TLD and I feel it will give .com a good .run.

Bob Allisat mentioned something yesterday about the number of existing
monopoly registries running all over the world, and pointed to these as
a reason shared registries shouldn't even be considered.  But I would
you his very same example to prove the opposite.

Right now there are any number of operating monopoly registries.  How
many can be named that aren't mired in disputes.  On newdom and
domain-policy we saw message after message about  ISO country code
registries and the problems monopolistic controls were having worldwide.

Let's say you are granted exclusivity of .web.  How are we(the
community) going to guarantee up front that your registry will be
responsive to the public needs?  What recourse will we have if you are
not?  You have said time and time again that you should be allowed to
run your registry as you see fit.  Isn't this what NSI is doing?

Vince Wolodkin