View Single Post
Old 28-03-2006, 06:26:40 AM     #5 (permalink)
EdPhillips
Nominet Staff
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 80
EdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond reputeEdPhillips has a reputation beyond repute

Thanks netserve. The DRS is designed to be fair, too, of course. I rather hoped that that went without saying....but maybe not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by netserve
It would be nice to see a few cases where the respondent was as guilty as hell but the expert decided that the complaint didn't deliver a case that proved guilt.
Well, I don't know about "guilty as hell" but there are certainly cases where the experts reject complaints that have not proved their case. One reasonably recently was (from memory) lhhscotland.co.uk, where if I remember rightly the Expert said (I paraphrase) 'you're the wrong complainant. If you'd have been the right one, you'd probably have won.'

Quote:
Originally Posted by netserve
I've got a great deal of respect for the legal bods at Nomient but I'm not sure the DRS results come across in the right way.
And that's what I'm trying to pin down. If there are no specific problems, just a general impression, I want to understand the root of that general impression. It may just be bad presentation, or it may track back to something else.
EdPhillips is offline