[governance] PIR Case/or the .org sell

[Bill Woodcock]

> On Nov 28, 2019, at 1:24 PM, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
> What's your source for the assumption that a price hike would only
> increase the price to $12/year or $15/year?

You can’t have it both ways, either it’s my assumption, or I have an external source for it.

As it happens, it’s my assumption.  I base it on thirty five years of experience dealing with domain names, and the further foundational assumptions that any purchaser of PIR would, at worst, be interested in maximizing profit, rather than in minimizing the number of registrations.

Why would you assume otherwise?

> A related question is whether there is anything in the rules that would
> prevent price differentiation

How is that related?  Also, the answer is “yes.”  Trying to make it sound as though that’s an unanswered question, or doesn’t have an answer which is obvious and clear, is fatuous.

> it might charge say $1000/year or $10000/year or even more?

Did you somehow hope that that wouldn’t sound ridiculous, as you were typing it?

> We should also consider the perspective of the general public, who will
> get annoyed by lots of broken links to non-profit orgs and to content
> provided by them.

No, they won’t, because it won’t happen.  You’re going overboard in your effort to create FUD.

> Do we really want to live in a world where a price hike is allowed to
> break all links to content at archive.org and intgovforum.org etc etc?

Utter straw-man.

You don’t appear to be trying to have a conversation in good faith.

                                -Bill

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20191129/954fa1da/attachment.sig>