Re: Tired of Waiting

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com>]

John and all,

John Charles Broomfield wrote:

> Hi Chris,
>
> > How about a counterproposal? CORE and IOD negotiate what
> > is, to CORE, acceptable terms for .web. These terms are
> > reevaluated every year, and if IOD is meeting them, nothing
> > changes. Only if IOD fails to meet the terms, is the contract
> > rebid?
> >
> > That prevents CORE from just selecting another "bidder" because
> > of any personal choices, rather than negotiated terms.
> >
> > I don't speak for IOD on this, but as a shareholder, I would bring
> > it to the board.
>
> I wish I had as much clout. I'm just a lowly PAB member.

  Oh wonderful!

>
>
> > PS: ietf list removed at the request of Fred Baker.
> > --
> > Christopher Ambler, Personal Opinion Only
>
> Note that CORE is the conglomerate of ALL the registrars, or said in another
> word it is ALL the customers of the registry.

  ALL registrars?  Says who?  You?  Well John, neither you nor CORE
have any such position or can accurately make any such claim.

> So, within the spirit of competition (which is what EVERYONE seems to want
> to promote), you can't come to the table with a known un-negotiable outcome
> of "IOD *WILL* be the .web registry for CORE".

  Nor can CORE decide whom will be the registry or registrar for anything
as the have of late yet again.

http://www.corenic.org/press_releases/july15.htm

> Any contract set out by CORE must be open for public bidding by any company.

And what legal mandate or point of law give CORE any such powers?Answer:  NONE!
What CORENIC is now doing is paramount
to conspiracy or intent to commit a FRAUD!
See  http://www.corenic.org/press_releases/july15.htm

> If two companies can accomplish all the terms set out in the public bid,
> and both can give the same guarantees, then in all common sense the company
> that can offer it at the better price should win.

  Sure this is true.  But CORE or CORENIC has no such authority to provide for
this.  Neither does the IANA or the ISOC at this juncture, nor have they ever!

> There's already one contract in place with Emergent.

Yes, and a fraudulent one at that.  They have no working gTLD's and noentry into
the Root.  They are selling swamp gas at so much a POP.  taking
advantage in a purposeful and fraudulent manner of less informed people.
They should be STOPPED!

> Could someone give us the details of this contract (ie, when does it come
> under revision or go up for grabs again)? If so, I would argue forcefully
> for IOD to be a bidder for being a registry as soon as it comes around
> again.
> Comments?

  Well you got mine Fella!

> Why IOD didn't bid in the first place I can't understand...

  I sure can.  They don't want to be involved in fraudulent activity, that is
why John.
Pretty easy and simple....

> A series of
> requirements were drawn up for what the database/interface had to do and
> were handed around so that companies could bid. A few showed interest, but I
> think that only one (Emergent) in the end actually put together a serious
> proposal, which is why they were "lumped" with the job... (I may be mistaken
> in my appreciations, so corrections are welcome).
>
> Yours, John Broomfield.

 Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com