Comments on: Public comment period bonanza

By: Dave

Dave — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 23:31:58 +0000

I won’t comment on the all above comments even though I was a regfly customer.

I think its great that Icann has provided the opportunity to comment. The ability to comment on policy regarding the registry failover plan is great. Thanks.

By: CaptainProton

CaptainProton — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 04:33:41 +0000

There is no veiled legal threat, and it was not intended to be. I most likely will not be able to show up because of other obligations. It’s just a question of hiring someone else to show up to voice my primary concern for ten minutes. That ICANN needs to do the job that they say that they are going to do.

That’s great thay you plan to a Registerfly update sometime and certainly understand if you don’t get to it for a while. My main concern is the litigation PDFs so I can understand better what ICANNs actual actions are compared to their talk about new policy.

I think that my patience has been abundantly demonstrated by the fact that it has been 4+ months that I have not mentioned a word about ICANN’s seeming failure to keep their website (aka Registerfly section) up to date.

By: Kieren McCarthy

Kieren McCarthy — Fri, 26 Oct 2007 01:06:31 +0000

I should have remembered that closely following over-reaction from Captain Proton comes veiled legal threats.

Re: RegisterFly and Kevin Medina – in fact I have been meaning to do an update on the litigation that ICANN continues to follow up on, but in the build up to the Los Angeles meeting next week it has got left behind amid 1,000 other things.

Rather than making wild and inaccurate accusations, you should really just turn up and talk to people. You’ll find that alot of people are putting in a lot of work on this issue.

Kieren

By: CaptainProton

CaptainProton — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 18:06:11 +0000

Well this is not the first, or even second time that I have had to plead for the litigation documents to be posted. It seems logical to me that the way to set future policy is to see how well past policy has been able to enforce necessary rules and ameliorate problems caused by registrar malfeasant behavior. Which in my eyes at least, ICANN has miserably failed to do before the Registerfly fiasco, and post-RF may be returning to again.

It would be nice if really ICANN would keep the litigation documents page up to date on a monthly basis. Do we need to make a rule for that? New policy? In general, do we need more policy and rules when the old ones just need to be followed and enforced? It’s not a question of more rules/policy for me, but common-sense follow-through for me. Well, maybe it is at the FTC level.

So much as going to LA is concerned, I’m thinking about it. Maybe I’ll have an attorney show up in my stead.

By: Kieren McCarthy

Kieren McCarthy — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 15:02:20 +0000

I love how your first response is always one of over-reaction, Captain Proton.

I will look into it this litigation thing.

Although I have to say I think you *should” come down to Los Angeles and “call us out”. There is a workshop on the RAA and registrants’ rights – you’re a registrant, you have suffered because of the existing system. I think you should come down and say what you think. That’s why we have these meetings.

With luck you would also sit in a few sessions and talk to people and at least understand why things are as they are. And, if you aren’t happy with what people are doing to change the situation so people like you don’t get caught up again, then you can stand up in front of everyone and say so.

Kieren

By: CaptainProton

CaptainProton — Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:19:49 +0000

I see that you have not updated the Registerfly litigation documents. Would you please do so? I’m still having issues with this that godaddy et al could not resolve. The last time you did so was June.

Inexcusable. I really don’t want to have to fly down to LA and call you out in person at the meeting next week over this.