Re: Our consensus doesn't decide anything

[Christopher Ambler <chris@iodesign.com>]

> Jeff Williams writes:
>  > this list.  There seem to be four areas of serious contention. 1.) The
>  > amount of the registration fee. 2.) The lottery selection process.
>  > 3.) The 60 day waiting period. 4.) A totaly shared model.

> 1. The registration fee is completely uncontriversial. The IAHC has
>    repeatedly said that the fee will be based on actual costs spread
>    over the inital registrars. What possible controversy could exist?

The possibility that the IAHC will inflate the budget or just fail to
provide one at all. This is a wait-and-see, however.

> 2. Several extremely good proposals have been advanced. Anyone who feels
>    that some sort of change will not be forthcoming hasn't been
>    listening to the comments.

But who knows what the IAHC will put in their final document? An interim
draft would make this a lot less controversial.

> 3. The 60-day waiting period is probably dead unless the INTA has more
>    clout than I can see. There appears to be precedent for a 60-day or
>    less publication period, similar to DBA laws in many states.

Here I agree with you (and hope you're right).

> 4. The shared model is the only way to go. The only people who doubt
>    this are greedy, short-sighted money grabbers like Palmer.

Name calling fails to make your point. The shared model is most definately
not the only way to go. The exclusive model makes more economic sense, is
easier to implement, is fairer for all concerned, allows brand development,
competes with NSI on their own ground, and has been proven to be operational
here and now.

You are far, very far, from claiming that your position is the consensus.



--
Christopher Ambler
President, Image Online Design, Inc.