Re: Iperdome Press Release!

[Vince Wolodkin <wolodkin@digitalink.com>]

Dave Crocker / IMC wrote:
> 
> At 12:13 PM 7/21/97 -0400, Vince Wolodkin wrote:
> >> >You are apparently making contigency plans to takeover .com, I wonder if
> >>
> >>         another tiresome fantasy from the pseudo-mind of Vince.
> >
> >Actually not, check the archives.  Now, perhaps it was someone on PAB
> >making bullshit arguments, but just last week the list was informed that
> >the $10,000 non-refundable fee was in preparation to takeover .com.
> >None of you POXers called it fantasy then because it propped you up.
> 
>         That was not the language used.  If you have specific SOURCE DATA to
> substantiate your claim, please cite it explicitly, rather than citing a
> multi-megabyte archive and leaving the searching task to the rest of us.
> 
>         That way we don't have to get into a no-we-didn't/yes-we-did debate.  We
> can all see exactly what you are referring to and decide whether the
> problem is what was said or how you interpreted it.
> 

Here you go, the Subject of the thread was Re: Legalese.  No-one
indicated that Kent was wrong.  If you wish to do it now, then by all
means do so.  I took out my responses and just left Kent's message.  To
be in context we are talking about the $10,000 fee below.  The message
was posted to domain-policy, newdom, and gtld-discuss.  Surely you must
have seen it, the exchange took place just last week.

Kent Crispin wrote:
> 
> However, you must remember that the infrastructure must be capable of
> taking over NSI's current load, and that is something that I (for
> example), with my little network of linux machines, simply cannot do.
> [Of course, what happens with NSI is problematic.  But the CORE
> registries must be capable of handling the load, if it is given to
> them.] Like it or not, there is significant infrastructure involved,
> and it costs money.
>
> If it weren't for the near-term potential load from .com and so on,
> much less money would be required, a more leisurely pace could be
> adopted, and very small businesses like mine could be players.  But
> this is the real world, Vince.
> 
> --
> Kent Crispin                            "No reason to get excited",
> kent@songbird.com                       the thief he kindly spoke...
> PGP fingerprint:   B1 8B 72 ED 55 21 5E 44  61 F4 58 0F 72 10 65 55
> http://songbird.com/kent/pgp_key.html