>> ... He has more right to be here than some of the members, whose link
>> as individuals to domains is so tenuous as to make the IDNO group
>> meaningless.
>Given the seriousness of that allegation, I would appreciate it if
>you would substantiate it with specific facts.
Well, let's see . . .
We have Jay Fenello, whose domain (iperdome.com) is registered to a corporation.
We have a number of people on this list who have suggested that nothing more than being the admin/tech/zone contact for a domain should be required . . . because their domains are all held in the names of corporate entities. Golly, you *have* been reading the list, right?
>We have published a very rough first cut at membership requirements --
>amounting essentially to control of a domain name.
Awfully tenuous. Try whois on ibm.com, for instance. Guess what: the admin contact is a real person. In fact, I'd venture to say (from my own experience with whois queries) that a substantial minority (at least 35%) of the admin contacts for major trademark holders/Fortune 1000 companies are individual accounts, not role accounts. So how does the rubric "control of a domain name" mean anything? Now, "ownership" of a domain name is a meaningful filter.
>By my reading of the whois records both Kent Crispin and Dave Crocker
>clearly could be members if they chose to join.
>I believe my own control of cavebear.com and other domains makes me
>elegible as well.
Assuming that "Cavebear" is your nom de commerce, that's of course true. If course, you might be a bit put out to show a paper trail that validates that assumption, but I'm not about to challenge it (for reasons made clear below).
As I have said before, if the REGISTRANT of the domain is not an individual, then we've established a criterion for membership that includes many of the Fortune 1000 companies. Which in turn means that there are other, less patent, selection criteria at work.
>By-the-way, what domain name are you planning to use to support your
>own membership?
As I told y'all when I joined up: cybersharque.com. I am the registrant. I am also the Admin and billing contact. But I don't consider that relevant. I've served as the admin, billing and or zone contact for a slough of domains in the past, but I never would have thought that doing so gave me "control" of the domain. One might as well think that a quartermaster's mate has "control" over a capital ship which he's piloting. (Hint: the responsibility for what the QM does rests with whichever officer has the conn; it's he or she who has control of the ship; and the conn of a domain name rests with the registrant, not with the contact persons named in the template. Don't take my word for it: ask David Graves about, f'rinstance, the FINY.com domain name dispute.)
Of course, what's really bizarre here is that (without any sort of notice to me or a vote or anything else) I have been purged from membership in the Cyberspace Association :-S
Go ahead. Look at the website. Yesterday, I was listed among the founders of the Association. Today, I have been ostracized, and nobody even bothered to smash up the pottery before doing so.
And you guys have the nerve to suggest that you're a legitimate voice of individual domain name holders? This is some kind of joke! The funny thing is, I've been pushing away the players in the domain name war who believe that I should organize an individuals' constituency as a counterweight to IDNO. I believed (up until I found myself purged, about half an hour ago) that while I had differences with some of the members here, it was in the best interest of the Internet that we work together to advance the empowerment of individuals with respect to the internet.
And then you guys decided to go ahead and purge me :-)
Golly gosh gee willickers, but you've simplified my life :-)
<As always, please disregard the silly trailer, which I did not write and which I cannot disable while using this client>
KJC.2
**********************************************************************
The information contained in this electronic message is confidential
and is or may be protected by the attorney-client privilege, the work
product doctrine, joint defense privileges, trade secret protections,
and/or other applicable protections from disclosure. If the reader of
this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
that any use, dissemination, distribution or reproduction of this com-
munication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communi-
cation in error, please immediately notify us by calling our Help Desk
at 212-541-2000 ext.3314, or by e-mail to helpdesk@rspab.com
**********************************************************************