Chris,

Do you want to tell me how many CEOs would respond to such rants? Kim's made other valid points. But it's such an ill thought out diatribe that it doesn't even deserve a response. Do you think a CEO should respond to you just because you email him/her?

Clear rational arguments may get you somewhere. I could only imagine the delete button would have been used for your rant. In the hard copy world it would have been the recycling bin.

David


----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Bell <lists-dns&#167;blueskyhost.com>
To: .au DNS Discussion List <dns&#167;dotau.org>
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 4:56:01 AM
Subject: [DNS] [Fwd: paul twomey]

seem to have an issue with issuing address.

cb
--


Message-ID: <451D6923.5040603&#167;blueskyhost.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 04:42:43 +1000
From: Chris Bell <lists&#167;blueskyhost.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (Windows/20060909)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: ".au DNS Discussion List" <dns&#167;dotau.org>
Subject: paul twomey
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit



So where does this guy - Paul Twomey - stand now? He seems to still be 
on the board of ICANN. I certainly do have the ability to go off the 
deep end, but what the hell has this guy ever done for the rest of us?

Seeing as i've emailed it to him , blogged it, and not provided a single 
one of you with any useful form of advice in the last 6 months (I do 
have some), I post it here for all posterity. Judge me for that if you 
choose. He's not going to respond, so the rest of you are welcome. But I 
have emailed and telephoned Paul Twomey repeatedly for the last few 
years and he doesn't do sh!t for me, even though I have family (read 
government) connections.

I call HIM. I'm not the president of ICANN. HE is.

I do realise that I have better things to worry about, as you do, as he 
does, but on the other hand it's an Australian that has presided over a 
new form of f#cking the the domain system up for the last five years. 
And he should be held accountable for his complete lack of achievements. 
And his legacy: what A MESS.

I'd welcome you to nominate any positive successes on the part of Paul 
Twomey. I'd also welcome you to comment on what an un-regulated mess the 
whole TLD situation has become. We used to be able to rely on suppliers, 
now we need to employ researchers. In fact, we need to employ lawyers.

I know that the quoted email below is tedious, vindictive, colloquial 
and quotational. Even nonsensical. But to be honest with you, I am so 
sick and tired of all the bullsh!t artists, whether they're a bunch of 
brothers in Perth asking my clients to pay $200 for a domain that 
doesn't exist, or an Australian in Washington, getting paid $2,000,000 
for a policy that doesn't exist.

So just skip to the point and criticise me for my argument that Twomey 
has been an ineffective CEO of the source of everything Internet.

I'm not pretending to be that - he is.

I'll summarise my argument thus:
- domain locking leads to anti-competitive practices: it is, if 
anything, a symptom of, or reaction to poor management and policy;
- domain tasting, camping, whatever you choose to call it, is a result 
of poor policy and a very public display of a complete misunderstanding 
of the domain market by its managers.

The market dictates that erroneously-registered domains are dispensable, 
as opposed to the domains that this five-day policy allows to be hijacked.

Paul - list your policies. Do you even subscribe to this list?

If you call yourself an Australian then one of your drones should post a 
response quoting on thread. Wouldn't that be impressive. On the other 
hand Paul, if you can't even get a proxy to reply, then you only serve 
to substantiate my arguments.

Can't believe I just spent two hours editing this post. Is it really 
that important?

cb
--

p.s. go swans

p.p.s. hi vic. hope you and your family are well. say hi to l&c.
--


To: Paul Twomey

Both points I emailed to you previously stand, except perhaps that they 
could use some clarification - that you would never bother reading 
yourself. Perhaps because of my typos, or perhaps because you simply 
don't care.

Chris Bell wrote:
> 1. why do we have to have registrar-lock to prevent automatic 
> transfer? it's a markey reaction to BS.

I meant a "market reaction to bullshit"; I suppose that anyone that ever 
bothered replying to a couple of emails would be familiar with that typo 
and not require me to explain it. On the other hand - you are a 
non-entity. A was-been. And you don't care to know if you're still 
anything.

You wouldn't be familiar with that type of ab-initio typo because you 
still outsource your replies to secretaries and assistants. This was a 
policy mistake in the first place - the locking of domains - and the 
correction that was implemented by the registrars proved to be even 
worse. However, I believe this started before your time. So I'll give 
you a break there.

But do you honestly think I'm going to stay up for another 3 hours 
before an AFL grand final verifying MY facts? It's YOUR job too. So you 
have the right of reply, and I have the right to cut my analysis short.

And you get paid much better than I do for it, so - suck on it. I have 
friends to host a BBQ for today on the poultry (no pun intended) $50 
that I can afford to spend, whilst YOUR clients are ripping holes in my 
pockets and you're not listening to me. And you're ripping millions out 
of my community.

We intend to enjoy the AFL grand final, you can just enjoy the 
osteoporosis that those falsely earned dollars in your pocket will cause 
you by weighing you down whilst my back bends over this keyboard and 
screen.

The fact of the matter is that domain-locking simply bypasses the 
problem of dom-jacking. It's a pathetic excuse of some form of corporate 
insecurity that only affects clever speculators. I've never found a 
domain name that I can't jack, and I continually test them with my own 
clients - with authorisation of course, not that I would submit the 
details to you.

On top of that, domain-locking actually locks a whole bunch of 
legitimate clients out of their own market and sends their IP (int. 
prop., not net address) off to a secondary market where a bunch of 
speculators argue over the trivial amount of dollars that they're 
willing to commit to stuff up a legitimate merchant whilst a bunch of 
yahoo-auctioneers that you've endorsed enrich themselves using a bunch 
of loop-holes that you've personally facilitated.

We should also consider how registrars use domain-locking to their own 
advantage, to deal with problem number two:

> 2. get rid of this 5 day grace period for newly-registered domains; 
> you've seen how the market reacts to this BS.


You're meant to be a policy man. I mean, after all, our government 
appointed you as the head of an ineffective think-tank that yielded no 
benefits for our economy. You produced a few very costly thousand-page 
reports - so have I. Except for the three zeros added to your price.

Do you think anyone actually reads them? I have, but I've never met a 
single other person who has read one of your NOIE reports in this 
country. Not a mention. Apart from my father - and the reason he 
presented your print copy to me was to ask me for advice. I've been 
working in the industry since 1995 - but you're simply not discussed in 
this country.

Maybe because you're ineffective? Maybe because you DON'T HAVE A FUCKING 
CLUE?

So explain to the rest of us how your "policy" is actually of benefit to 
us, let alone the common netizen. Or even what your "policy" is. Have 
you got a web site with a list of bullet points that we can read? No?

The user is in Shanghai, in Washington, in Buenos, Moscow, Beijing, 
Auckland, or in Sydney. You haven't attracted any sort of media 
attention whatsoever in the last five years. Is that a measure of your 
ineffectiveness?

As a matter of comparison, Al Gore, who used to dominate your publicity 
space very poorly (mainly due to Tipper's negativity), has recently been 
incredibly successful in pushing a message that he couldn't even bother 
wheeling around in a supermarket trolley seven years ago. Now, that's 
good policy. And a good message. And highly marketable.

It makes me so sick that I might just have to attach a CV. Because you 
need c&nts like me.

Get your shit together Paul, or just simply f&ck off. If you're just 
doing it for the money then your children will have nothing to aspire 
to. And wouldn't that be a shame.

It sickens me that you can achieve so little in so much time with so 
much money. I really don't understand how a man who gets so much so can 
achieve so little - especially with so many open windows.

Go the Swans.

Chris Bell
Blue Sky Host
-- 










---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://dotau.org/