Jim, Look up what an "ad hominem" argument is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem_circumstantial My personal wealth is secure, independent of whether new gTLDs are adopted. It matters more to me how .com is operated by VeriSign, than whether new gTLDs are introduced. The introduction of .info and .biz didn't cause my wealth to decline, indeed the opposite happened. I just happen to be in the group that thinks the "few gTLDs, each with a lot of active domains" is a better design than "many gTLDs, each with a smaller number domains", for a variety of reasons (I've outlined mine). If you have an argument to make that many new gTLDs are a good thing, you're free to do so. The community can then decide which design should be adopted. Calling one a "kook" or labeling them as speculators (which is funny given the large number of .info and .biz domains were registered speculatively, and not by me), doesn't contribute much to the debate, except to demonstrate a lack of imagination. At least I tried to show some imagination, with a few thought-provoking and striking pictures. :) New arguments do contribute to the debate. Name-calling does not. By the way, "speculators" are not a bad thing per se. If someone else happens to get to a domain name before you, or paid more for it than you did in an auction, and is not breaking any registration rules (like UDRP, etc.) or laws, and refuses to sell it to you, they are not doing anything wrong if they're not using the domain name in a matter that you desire. "Speculation" in many markets makes them more efficient, in that their pursuit of self-interest causes markets to reflect all information in prices, brings about equilibria, and ensures that goods are used in a manner that maximizes their long-term profitability. Speculators are a *healthy* part of capitalism. Market-based economies couldn't exist without them. Indeed, it's the absence of speculators that characterizes the most unhealthy centrally planned economies, like the old Soviet Union, Castro's Cuba, North Korea, etc. And, for the record, I buy more domains than I sell. :) And I own a lot fewer domains than such "hoarders" as P&G, who are doing nothing substantial with their Beautiful.com domain, for example. What anti-speculation rules do you propose to protect us from such "bad behaviour" that P&G is supposedly engaging in, "hoarding" such "beautiful" domain names?? Sincerely, George Kirikos http://www.kirikos.com/ _______________________________________________ domains-gen mailing list [email protected] http://discuss.tucows.com/mailman/listinfo/domains-gen
