Re: (none)

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Mark Henderson-Thynne wrote:
> 
> *sigh*
> 
> How many times so we have to make this point, how can we make it even
> clearer so you will understand:
> 
> 1) There is no such thing as pre-registration, zoen files for these domains
>     do not exist, the CORE database does not exist, how can registrations be
>     made to databases/zone files that do not yet exist. the term pre-registration
>     implies registering a name before registrations are allowed but that is
>     impossible as there is no way to register a name yet.
> 

Semantics.  Pure and simple.  There is the "letter" and there is the
spirit.  Hell, what am I saying, anyone offering to take domain requests
now and hold them until the floodgates open is violating the "sacred":-)
gTLD-MoU.  You can argue semantics all day, but you are quite simply
full of shit!

> 2) Clients have asked us to attempt to register their names as soon as
>     possible on day one. To make this easier for us and the client we are
>     taking their details now. When registrations are allowed we will submit
>     the names that clients have asked us to attempt to register. We are not
>     taking any money now and we will only bill clients once a name has been
>     successfully registered (i.e. after day one).
> 

Sorry, you rationalize so badly that you sound like a 4 year old with
his hand in the cookie jar.

> Lets try to make it even clearer still:
> 

The anticipation is overwhelming.

> 1) pre-registration cannot exist.
>

Wow, then why has POC gone to the trouble of forbidding?
 
> 2) taking advance orders to be submitted on day one can exist and lots
>     of companies are doing it.
>

And, as far as many of us are concerned, you shouldn't be allowed to
become registrars.  It just basically goes to show how you will try and
get *AROUND* the rules.
 
> 3) Clients want to be able to place an advance order as they see the importance
>     and legitimacy of the new gTLDs. For the same reason they have chosen not
>     to register in the "fake root nameserver confederations and domains".
>

Ahhhh, so buy allowing pre-registrations you hope to ensure the
legitimacy of the new domains.
 
> 3) not all these companies make it clear that registration isn't gauranteed
>     when the application is submitted.
>

I guess you just needed an extra bullet.
 
> 4) NetNames makes it very clear that placing an advance order gaurantees
>     nothing.
>

Your words "advance order".  The shit floweth.
 
> 5) NetNames is being positive and providing a service that clients want instead
>     of being negative and criticising the whole process.
>

Oh, the I'm onboard jab aimed at deflecting criticism.  Get a new line.
 
> OK, that may still be too complicated so I will try again:
> 
> 1) pre-registration cannot exist therefore NetNames (or anyone else) cannot
>     (and does not) pre-register.
> 

So, can you tell me why pre-registration has been forbidden if it cannot
exist?

> I hope you unstand the above but please feel  free to mail me if you have any other
> questions.
>

I hope YOU understand the above.  Quite frankly I am pretty sure you DO
understand the above, it's is just financially convenient for you to
play dumb.
 
> Mark......
> 

Vince