| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
SnapNames Response to Names Council Wait Listing Service Report
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 20 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
"I can see the existing registrars/namedrop services not wishing to release such numbers for competitive reasons."
Perhaps. My point is that until they do, to not preach consumer "best interests" by way of "competition" as part of ICANN's public "consensus" process. All that the registrars have done so far (in arguing against WLS for reasons of consumer best interests) is point to web sites showing various retail pricing for the opportunity to register something of scarce supply. This is not the same as providing actual data of what the average retail price to the consumer really has been from the status quo. Until the anti-WLS registrars provide this information and calculation, they should not be including in their propaganda campaign - in the public forum - of how the status quo better protects retail pricing to consumers. Their actions (such as during the biz and info landrush) point to entirely different motivations as this relates to price gouging of the consumer. Would the pricing data for deleted domains show the same? How would this stack up against the estimated consumer retail price of WLS? How is it that these basic and fundamental questions remain unanswered this far along in the WLS debate? Would this not be the first thing a real consumer would ask? How can the registrars claim the status quo is in the best interests of consumers when in fact no one knows what the average retail price is today for a deleted domain name in order to form a logical comparison? The fact that average consumers are not formally heard as part of this "debate" is one thing. But for the pro status quo group to claim consumer interests are being best represented is insulting without support data to back it up. This is noticeably missing, if you happen to be an average consumer. If this information is too confidential, then leave "best interests to the consumer" out of it....it does not belong and has no place in the debate.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re: SnapNames Response to Names Council Wait Listi
by RFassett
|
|
|
|
|
I agree. Further, what I'm saying is that even with that data the "best interests of the consumer" should be left out of the debate as the vast majority of consumers are not well served by either the status quo or WLS. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
