> But what if the end-user is himself moral, and therefore, > determines that (as is traditional) if he has no use for > the name, the only appropriate action is to leave it in > public for someone to take?
So by your definition, an end-user that determines he has no use for a name and then decides to sell it to someone who does is immoral and engaged in an inappropriate action? What if two different someones want the name? Who gets it? First come first served? Best public use? Highest bidder? Who decides? The People's Committee for Domain Name Allocation? > Expired names only "have value" because you play and promote > the game. If everyone let them expire, and nobody ever bought > a domain from an auctioneer or hoarder, the whole house of > cards would collapse as it should. Would you say the same thing about real estate? Gold? Food? Or is it only domain names that should be immune from market forces? Expired names have value if potential registrants value them. _______________________________________________ domains-gen mailing list [email protected] http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen
