<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Against proposed amendment
- To: jobs-phased-allocation@xxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Against proposed amendment
- From: Jim DAmico <jmdcomedy@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 14:21:19 -0700 (PDT)
As a recruiting professional, I have say this is a dreadful idea. The .jobs
name has proven unsuccessful, and this amendment is simply an attempt to
manufacture a need that does not exist, for the financial motivation of
principals leading the charge to ram the amendment through.
Contrary to conventional wisdom, more job related domains are not a benefit to
those seeking jobs. In fact based on the "noise" created by to many job sites,
fewer sites would provide the most benefit.
If there was a demand, wouldn't there have been more than the few thousand
sites
registered with the domain that occured over the last several years?
Also, and understand, I'm admittadly not some internet genious, but allowing
Employ Media such broad leeway in how the domain is dispensed and managed
smacks
to me of a path we've never walked before in regards to domains, and one we
should choose not to walk. The power is too broad, to vague. Dare I say to
absolute, and as we know absolute power creates the opportunity for absolute
abuse.
Again, I'm not the smartest person to weigh in on this, but I know a bum deal
when I see one.
Jim D'Amico
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|