Just an update on the Petition to Nominet that several here on this forum have signed, and the accompanying Open Letter that was sent to the Chair of Nominet, Mark Wood.
108 members with over 700,000 voting rights have signed this petition so far. The accompanying letter called for the Petition to be included as part of the consultation and its final report back; and stated that although signatories did not all expect the 'status quo' to be kept, many members were open to change in EPP or DAC acceptable use policy. It continued: "Both registrars and members rely on access to expired names to run their businesses so to destroy some registrar business models at a time of great economic uncertainty seems counterproductive. While we understand the technical problems in policing ‘drop catching’ many of your members and registrars act responsibility within the rules set by your registry. It is how you enforce and set those rules which Nominet needs to rectify."
This evening, Mark Wood has replied to the Open Letter:
1. Executive to give an update on their thinking shortly
2. The policy team is planning a further webinar
3. Nominet has added in some time to discuss this at the forthcoming AGM
Personally, in terms of realpolitik, I believe that the strongest line for domainers to take at this time is
(a) to highlight that they are being expected to 'take the hit' even though most people have played by Nominet's own rules - eg: disassociate from the rule breakers; and
(b) call for a 24 month pause, during this pandemic and economic crisis, out of respect for members who have done nothing but whose businesses will face threat from radical changes - and use that time to explore and test out ways of making an "Option C" work - rather than the ECA and Auction options as an inevitable binary.
I really think the case needs to be pushed for a Pause Period, under these circumstances, because it's a fair case and a matter of respect for members facing hardship. Otherwise, I can see the Nominet Executive steam-rollering whatever is their favoured option.
I suggest this argument should be pressed by multiple members at the AGM.
And before anyone says it, yes I know Nominet can pretty much do whatever they want, but "so what's the point?" achieves nothing.
A number of people are preparing questions to put to the Nominet Board on September 22nd.
108 members with over 700,000 voting rights have signed this petition so far. The accompanying letter called for the Petition to be included as part of the consultation and its final report back; and stated that although signatories did not all expect the 'status quo' to be kept, many members were open to change in EPP or DAC acceptable use policy. It continued: "Both registrars and members rely on access to expired names to run their businesses so to destroy some registrar business models at a time of great economic uncertainty seems counterproductive. While we understand the technical problems in policing ‘drop catching’ many of your members and registrars act responsibility within the rules set by your registry. It is how you enforce and set those rules which Nominet needs to rectify."
This evening, Mark Wood has replied to the Open Letter:
1. Executive to give an update on their thinking shortly
2. The policy team is planning a further webinar
3. Nominet has added in some time to discuss this at the forthcoming AGM
Personally, in terms of realpolitik, I believe that the strongest line for domainers to take at this time is
(a) to highlight that they are being expected to 'take the hit' even though most people have played by Nominet's own rules - eg: disassociate from the rule breakers; and
(b) call for a 24 month pause, during this pandemic and economic crisis, out of respect for members who have done nothing but whose businesses will face threat from radical changes - and use that time to explore and test out ways of making an "Option C" work - rather than the ECA and Auction options as an inevitable binary.
I really think the case needs to be pushed for a Pause Period, under these circumstances, because it's a fair case and a matter of respect for members facing hardship. Otherwise, I can see the Nominet Executive steam-rollering whatever is their favoured option.
I suggest this argument should be pressed by multiple members at the AGM.
And before anyone says it, yes I know Nominet can pretty much do whatever they want, but "so what's the point?" achieves nothing.
A number of people are preparing questions to put to the Nominet Board on September 22nd.
