On Sun, 16 Jan 2005, Ross Wm. Rader wrote:
They don't see these if the name in question is locked. -- Regards,
This is where I'm really getting confused. You seem to defend the current "transfer without explicit approval" method. Yet you also seem to be saying locking domains should be a matter of course, which negates the whole thing, brings back the original situation, but just adds an additional step.
No - I'm saying that explicit approval comes elsewhere in the process, but that like all systems, there are problems with it. Locking your domain name deals with these problems.
What do you see as being the original situation? As far as I'm concerned, the original situation is that a bunch of shady characters were gaming the process to benefit themselves without deference to the needs of their requirements. The solution to this was to ensure safe domain name portability for registrants - i.e. giving registrants the capability to choose who their provider is without interference by third parties.
-- Regards,
-rwr
"In the modern world the intelligence of public opinion is the one indispensable condition for social progress."
- Charles W. Eliot (1834 - 1926)
