Afilias can't complain if people suspect them of ANYTHING
- because they never engage in direct discussion or explanation about anything put
to them in a way that requires more detail and precision than their own vaguely-worded
They have made a policy of NOT engaging, not explaining (eg what registrars
should do about pre-registrations for any second landrush; why the Domebase proposal
can't be simply implemented; why they won't immediately delete ineligible names when
requested; how challenged names will be re-released; etc etc)
Into the obscurity
and evasion of their own making, it is hardly surprising if people put their own
conjecture, or interpret Afilias's obstructive silence as an admission of ill-intent
Since Afilias have made a process and corporate style out of evasion
via vague and imprecise information, it is little wonder that few trust them and
There has been not a squeak from Lubsen or laPlante or Palage in
the often rational debate over losses sustained by Landrush applicants. They have
chosen to evade the real debate, and try to impose a spin-universe of their own,
which they even seem/pretend to believe : this spin-fantasy calls their Sunrise a
"success", minimises the number of Frauds, and MAKES NO MENTION AT ALL about the
Landrush customers who have lost out.
Have Lubsen, Palage or laPlante made ANY
mention, apology, or defence of the defrauded Landrush customers? I've heard NO mention
: NOT A SINGLE WORD
What grounds for trust then?
Why should people trust them?
- where people come for NO information