- Joined
- Jan 16, 2006
- Posts
- 595
- Reaction score
- 8
With the non-exec candiates touting for votes, here are a couple of DRS related questions for them.
1. DRS Tasting
I placed an open invitation to Gordon Dick (and notified him by PM) some time ago (unfortunately unanswered as of yet) and to any/all of the non-execs on the board to comment on the practice outlined in this thread:
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/domain...html#post65291
Anyway, I'd be interested to hear what the candidates and also (in particular) any non-execs up for re-election (Jonathan Robinson?) have to say on the practice of DRS Tasting that some Complainant's now engage in.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is not altering errors or omissions in the electronic submission before it gets to the Registrant - but rather the practice of letting the full Complaint go to the Registrant and then seeing what is put in the Response. The Complaint is then withdrawn, only for another version to emerge a while later - with the defence already seen once and time and energy wasted by the (usually) smaller Registrant.
Also Nominet actually makes it clear that this practice is OK in its standard letters during a DRS - one might say they are condoning/encouraging it.
2. DRS Review
Personally, given the widely differnt views/ideas that the DRS consultation threw up (when compared to the direction the closed questions sought to steer people to consider) - I think the whole DRS reveiw needs to be repeated.
The first and only question people should be asked is:
"Should Nominet run the DRS, or should it outsource it?"
Invite a couple of people from either side of the fence to make their respective cases. A poll result should sort that one out, before moving onto the detailed issues that need covering.
1. DRS Tasting
I placed an open invitation to Gordon Dick (and notified him by PM) some time ago (unfortunately unanswered as of yet) and to any/all of the non-execs on the board to comment on the practice outlined in this thread:
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/domain...html#post65291
Anyway, I'd be interested to hear what the candidates and also (in particular) any non-execs up for re-election (Jonathan Robinson?) have to say on the practice of DRS Tasting that some Complainant's now engage in.
For the avoidance of doubt, this is not altering errors or omissions in the electronic submission before it gets to the Registrant - but rather the practice of letting the full Complaint go to the Registrant and then seeing what is put in the Response. The Complaint is then withdrawn, only for another version to emerge a while later - with the defence already seen once and time and energy wasted by the (usually) smaller Registrant.
Also Nominet actually makes it clear that this practice is OK in its standard letters during a DRS - one might say they are condoning/encouraging it.
2. DRS Review
Personally, given the widely differnt views/ideas that the DRS consultation threw up (when compared to the direction the closed questions sought to steer people to consider) - I think the whole DRS reveiw needs to be repeated.
The first and only question people should be asked is:
"Should Nominet run the DRS, or should it outsource it?"
Invite a couple of people from either side of the fence to make their respective cases. A poll result should sort that one out, before moving onto the detailed issues that need covering.
