Re: consensus and the 60-day issue

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

Dave,

  Please read below your comments.

Dave Crocker wrote:
> 
> At 1:20 AM -0800 12/28/96, Einar Stefferud wrote:
> >So, "60" is just another mostly undistinguished number in a long
> 
>         This, of course, does not mean that it was randomly chosen.  It was
> chosen by trying to consider a balance between having it be long enough to
> allow ample notice for potential protestors to the use of name, and short
> enough to be tolerable to the applicants.  The former force has to work
> within global legal processes -- not notably swift -- and the latter would
> ideally make the number zero.

  Well put Dave.  The problem is that by using 60 days, you are as
an org, saying that it is ok for members of the global legal profession
to lagg and by the way, guess what?  You applicants get the doubious
pleasure of paying for it.  Not good enough!  We surely can do better
than this.  Shorten the waiting period.  That is the only reasonable
answer.  
> 
> >On the other hand, I see lots of statements that though there is no
> >obvious gain to be obtained, there is also no significant downside
> 
>         The statements that you might have missed note that defining a
> formal waiting period might have the benefit of weakening LATER challenges,
> thereby giving the applicant considerably greater security in their use of
> the name, after they start to invest in it.

  WHoa!  Start ti invest in it?  They did that when they put up $20k!
Pretty good start I think!

  As to "Later Challenges".  That is a function of those waiting to do
the challenging.  They need to get off their duffs and get busy.  I 
see no reason to provide for that possibility in this manner.  They
have the court system to do that with.  It should not be a function
of the rest of us to provide for that.  Not good enough, again!

Regards,


> 
> d/
> 
> (read the last line, please)
> ----------------------------
> Dave Crocker, Director                                       +1 408 246 8253
> Internet Mail Consortium                                 (f) +1 408 249 6205
> 127 Segré Place                                             dcrocker@imc.org
> Santa Cruz, CA  95060 USA                                 http://www.imc.org
> 
> Also:  IAHC member, expressing strictly (or loosely) personal opinions

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. 
Phone :972-447-1878
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com