PAB - what it is - what it can do

[Jac]

Then why doesn't Nominet ask them James?

They do it with the Registrant satisfaction survey so why not the Foundation?
http://www.nic.uk/news/latest/?contentId=4809

Why do you make everything sound like you're spitting it?

I agree with you. I think Nominet should ask them. Then again, Nominet already does, and on an ongoing basis. Futher to that, I agree with the idea of a Member and even Registrant Liaison Officer whose purpose would be to ensure Members and Registrants understood more about Nominet, its communication's processes, what it does, why it does it, and to feed back to Nominet what they get told by Members and Registrants.

Also 1.2 million of those names I now look after at work - how does Pipex get a say in how the money is spent?

Don't Pipex have an ongoing dialogue with Nominet? I was under the impression they did and I was under the impression Nominet is proactive in seeking opinion from all its registrars, particulary those with most voting power?

What if they wanted £2.5 million to give to charity or to setup their own foundation?

I'd love to see it, it would bring immense returns in terms of good public relations for Pipex (brand awareness) and be of enormous benefit to the people they serve.

Who spends money on promoting and managing .uk and makes nothing on them?

Don't confuse being a Nominet Member with being a Nominet Registrar. A 'for profit' registrar may promote domain names as a loss leader (or at low cost) to entice the purchase of their value added services so they can make a profit. Being a Nominet Member and a Nominet Registrar are not the same.

I have often said that as members of the .uk registry (which IMO is the people's registry) we are all bound by a common purpose, that of the registry's mission statement and objectives. It is as Registrars that we make loads wonga through our own endeavours. The two, in my opinion, are not inextricably joined at the hip. One is a community objective, the other is a commercial 'let's make loadsa money' objective. The problem is that most 'for profit' registrars do not see it that way, even though the logistics of membership suggest the members should support the community objectives of the Registry.

Why is the money not spent on making the registry systems stable? Why did the December renewals go wrong? Why is there not FREE online transfers? Why is there one DAC to share between 4 brands? Why is Nominet XML not EPP?

What do they actually get out of all of this?........capped voting rights? Oh yeah and by the next AGM the mem & arts changed so the members lose control forever:

Board = 3 appointed + 3 elected + 3 employed

These are concerns I agree with and openly too. But just as members may be concerned they will "lose control" of Nominet, so The Board may be concerned the Membership will 'lose control' if Nominet is captured by a subset of the registrar community.

If that happened, it could well mean the end to small registrars and level playing fields, because The NEW Board could change the membership fees or create a situation where it only dealt with big registrars a la ICANN style. The question that needs to be asked is, would limiting the choice of registrants be in the interest of the wider community? It might be, I don't know, but the prospect of the people's registry being run by a subjective group of people with only self-interests in mind leaves me cold.

Now we're into other issues than just the Foundation, but the answers are just as important as the questions (from a community perspective that is).

Regards
James

 

[Jac]

Sorry James that is also factually incorrect....

I still have my email here which I sent to Nominet and Eric Ramage with 11 issues in it for the work programme. I also have a reply from Nominet where 5 were accepted and 6 were turned down with valid and fair enough reasons. This email was even sent to the SMT.

My unreserved apologies. My boob. Sorry.

Not sure why your having extra conversations about my professionalism...

And I'm not sure why you can't just take the compliment gracefully, there was no ulterior motive except praise.

However I did indeed write 3 pages of A4 for the sub-committee meeting - of which only three other elected members attended - not one single appointed member turned up.

Neither did I but you know the reason why. That aside, I wouldn't expect appointed members to turn up as the Nominet Foundation is very much a Membership issue and only Eric Ramage (appointed) is a Nominet Member in his own right as well as PAB Chair.

Regards
James

 

[Jac]

I stand corrected regarding the Nominet cost James. Your post went off on a tangent there, so I’ll bring it back to the point i am trying to make, which is that irrespective of the irrelevant mark-ups and/or loss leaders introduced by those you mention, the one certain cost is the £2.50 charged by Nominet. The fact of the matter is this; Nominet could reduce the registration cost to £1.74/annum. Instead, it is charging a whopping 43% more than it should for every single domain name. I don’t know how you can feel comfortable about this James. In any other business model, overcharging over 6.5 million people by 43% for what is to them a ‘public’ service is not good reading to my mind!

Sorry, I wasn't dissing your point, just explaining why I think cost can be deceptive and how the buyer usually ends up paying more anyway somewhere else along the way.

I accept you think 6.5 million people are being overcharged, but I also explained yesterday why lowering the price of domains might just bring a whole new set of costs, like increased dissatisfaction among most of those 6.5 million people (because it's now even more difficult to get their domain name of choice) or increased DRS complaints (inevitable when its a numbers game) and increased costs for parking or hosting of those domains. Sure, you might make more money out of them too and it's swings and roundabouts, but there are other influences it would be prudent to take notice of both in the U.S. and in the UK. Not least of all the "Anti-Phishing Consumer Protection Act of 2008" (APCPA) in the US Senate. I've uploaded a copy here. www.conaghan.me.uk/APCPA

The implications of this Bill for "domainers" is quite far reaching and when you consider similar recommendations and regulations are being discussed in our own parliament, the cost of a domain name may be the least of your worries.

I'd like to ensure government and regulatory authorities are properly advised and better informed as to the intricacies of the domain name system and the 'use' of domain names before someone proposes legislation that may lack the appropriate understanding of domain names and the DNS and which might affect a significant subset of the community significantly more than cheaper domains might.

Regards
James

 

[Whois-Search]

Futher to that, I agree with the idea of a Member and even Registrant Liaison Officer whose purpose would be to ensure Members and Registrants understood more about Nominet, its communication's processes, what it does, why it does it, and to feed back to Nominet what they get told by Members and Registrants.

I agree Nominet should have Kieren McCarthy type character http://public.icann.org

In fact you would make a good candidate for the job ......

Don't Pipex have an ongoing dialogue with Nominet? I was under the impression they did and I was under the impression Nominet is proactive in seeking opinion from all its registrars, particulary those with most voting power?

I'm sure we have all heard about the so called strategy meetings between the Top 10 registrars and Nominet. Also Stuart Dennis Key Account manager has now been assigned to the Top 50 registrars only I believe.

Don't confuse being a Nominet Member with being a Nominet Registrar. A 'for profit' registrar may promote domain names as a loss leader (or at low cost) to entice the purchase of their value added services so they can make a profit. Being a Nominet Member and a Nominet Registrar are not the same.

Then why can't a rebate be given back to Registrars?

These are concerns I agree with and openly too. But just as members may be concerned they will "lose control" of Nominet, so The Board may be concerned the Membership will 'lose control' if Nominet is captured by a subset of the registrar community.

The members own Nominet not the board?

If that happened, it could well mean the end to small registrars and level playing fields, because The NEW Board could change the membership fees or create a situation where it only dealt with big registrars a la ICANN style.

In my opinion this is already being thought about:

"Giving the directors the power to change all fees"
http://www.nic.uk/policy/consultations/previous/firstgov

"A new Registrar will be asked to complete a series of courses to demonstrate a basic understanding of the .uk registration and maintenance process. Existing Registrars may also be asked or wish to complete these courses".
http://www.nic.uk/registrars/ra/gpt/

 

[Jac]

I agree Nominet should have Kieren McCarthy type character http://public.icann.org

In fact you would make a good candidate for the job ......

You may think that, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Then why can't a rebate be given back to Registrars?

I can't speak for Nominet, but I am personally happy for registrars to lobby The Board on that basis, although I think you took a tad more journalistic licence with my comments than I'd have liked. I was pointing out that it is through their own endeavours as Registrars that Nominet Members create their own wealth (and good luck to them). I was also pointing out that as Members of a not-for-profit Registry we should/could have a common purpose in membership (I seem to be in a minority on that point).

The members own Nominet not the board?

Not sure exactly how you mean that question, but Nominet is a membership organisation where the members can cast votes for the election candidates of their choice, and I mean Board elections in this instance. So in that respect they can help elect non-executives they feel will address their concerns in the boardroom. The problem is, once a candidate is elected to a board, they then have a duty to the company first, so there's a conflict of interests between who elected them and who's interests they must serve first and foremost.

"Giving the directors the power to change all fees"
http://www.nic.uk/policy/consultations/previous/firstgov

That was the consultation question, I don't think the findings of that consultation are public yet? I haven't seen them if they are.

"A new Registrar will be asked to complete a series of courses to demonstrate a basic understanding of the .uk registration and maintenance process. Existing Registrars may also be asked or wish to complete these courses".
http://www.nic.uk/registrars/ra/gpt/

Again, I'm not sure how you mean this. Don't you think it's a good thing to ensure that all new members/registrars have a minimum level of knowledge commensurate with the industry they will be trading in? This is already part of the Best Practice terms all registrars agree to, so it's not really a new thing. Nominet has been offering registrar induction (or training) days for years.

Regards
James

 

[Whois-Search]

Again, I'm not sure how you mean this. Don't you think it's a good thing to ensure that all new members/registrars have a minimum level of knowledge commensurate with the industry they will be trading in? This is already part of the Best Practice terms all registrars agree to, so it's not really a new thing. Nominet has been offering registrar induction (or training) days for years.

We was talking about Nominet going down the road of ICANN...

What if the Hutty Clause was removed and the Financials changed to be like this:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/accreditation-financials.htm

Then the training became a Nominet Accreditation process:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/accreditation-application.htm

Us small 'pesky' members wouldn't be able to renew our membership without spending £££££

 

[Jac]

We was talking about Nominet going down the road of ICANN...

What if the Hutty Clause was removed and the Financials changed to be like this:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/accreditation-financials.htm

Then the training became a Nominet Accreditation process:
http://www.icann.org/registrars/accreditation-application.htm

I guess we'll know the answers to all these things, at least for the next year, at the AGM at the end of April.

Us small 'pesky' members wouldn't be able to renew our membership without spending £££££

I thought you worked for a big 'pesky' member now!?

Regards
James

 

[Whois-Search]

I guess we'll know the answers to all these things, at least for the next year, at the AGM at the end of April.

Yes IMO the next AGM will be the most important in Nominet's history.

We are at a crossroads....

I thought you worked for a big 'pesky' member now!?

I'm still a member in my own right and on here i'm off duty

 

[bb99]

Yes IMO the next AGM will be the most important in Nominet's history.

We are at a crossroads....

Call me cynical, but I think that the real issues will take second stage - there will be some backslapping PR fanfare on something like enum so as to distract us all from what's really going on. :-D