- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 102
- Reaction score
- 0
flong101, I have remarked on your posting in the other thread as well, I really wish you would deal in fact rather than create fictional stories that are only meant to be combative. You wrote:
"Interesting how Pool does not deny that it was them after all the cause of the cancellation." There is no doubt that we had an issue with the TBR, that is easily shown in the temporary results which some of you I assume have seen. I do not deny that. What I will profusely deny is that the TBR was cancelled on the basis of our technical issue. My understanding is there were multiple registrars affected (not just ours) and ultimately CIRA had to make a tough decision. As I said in my original post, if Pool was found to be at fault, we would have taken our lumps and learned our lesson. Clearly this was not the case. Others were also affected.
"Instead they elect to post this load of BS believing that we are all idiots." I have been fortunate enough to meet many of my customers based in Canada and I can assure you I don't believe you "are all idots". There is no BS in my posting. Everything is factual. And I would hope that those of you who have met me would echo that I operate openly and with integrity.
"So Momentous is located in Ottawa as is CIRA." So is Sibername, and I suspect other registrars, who cares? If it's relevent, Sibername's offices are within walking distance of CIRA! Give me a break, our offices are in the same city somehow allows you to draw some kind of conclusion?
"What happened in the wee hiours of the night? Pool showed up at CIRA offices to "oversee the integrity of the session"?Or does pool have enough directors and staff at CIRA that they really don't need to show up as they are already there?" Neither Pool.com nor Momentous have any directors or staff at CIRA. And if you really want to know, I attended a rather disappointing hockey game last night. And my staff went home. There was nothing we could do to influence CIRA, they had communicated they would investigate the performance of the drop and publish the results which was fine with us. I found out the results this morning on arriving at my office. As stated elsewhere, if the decison was made to allow the TBR to stand, Pool.com would have taken its lumps and learned a lesson.
"Do other registrars know that while they believe they have a relationship with CIRA, they in fact have a relationship controlled and managed by Pool?" Where do you dream up this stuff? Are you really willing to be hauled in front of a judge to support these accusations?
"Webnames does not do much in TBR so it is not a factor here. But Pool is the major player and Pool controls CIRA." Pool controls CIRA? Really? How? Again, these wild accusations are blindingly false and I sure hope you have a good legal defence if you are ever asked by either CIRA or Pool.com to defend your accusations.
"And this whole ambiguity issue is such an insulting term to every one out there. All registrars from Burmac to Sibername managed to figure out the TBR without issue. Only Pool found it ambiguous?" Again, totally incorrect. According to CIRA, multiple registrars were affected, not just the registrars used by Pool.com. Is it fair to say that "most" registrars "figured it out"? Yes, I think so. But that fact that not all "figured it out" correctly suggests that the CIRA decision is correct.
"And then CIRA decides, to cancel?" Yes, despite knowing that their decision would in fact be seen/interpreted by some the way you are portraying it, they did the right thing! I am confident that any of the decision making trail would stand up to scrutiny and while you may not personally like the decision, I believe it was based on sound data and judgement and was indeed made after very careful consideration by CIRA.
"So in the end, the only party that matters is Pool. And again all registrars do not have a relationship with a transparent entity that treats all fairly and at arm length. They really have a relationship with Pool." Again the facts state that multiple registrars were affected, not just the ones used by Pool.com.
"The .ca domain namespace is a canadian asset. This is not a Pool asset. What transpired is nothing less than a travesty. How do we get IndustryCanada involved?" I would welcome any inquiry by Industry Canada rather than listen to more of your unfounded conjecture and wild accusations. Further, I hope you are prepared to stand up in a public court and defend your comments and accusations rather than rant and rave behind an alias that may or may not be traceable to a real person.
---------- Post added at 02:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 PM ----------
zoobar, you are right that the TBR ran last week but it did not run successfully allowing all registrars to submit command streams. You may recall there was an issue with IP addresses that inhibited some registrars from actually connecting to the process. You'd have to look at the CIRA announcements when it was shut down but as I recall, the shut down occurred just prior to the actual scheduled start time (or within a minute or two of the start possibly).
"Interesting how Pool does not deny that it was them after all the cause of the cancellation." There is no doubt that we had an issue with the TBR, that is easily shown in the temporary results which some of you I assume have seen. I do not deny that. What I will profusely deny is that the TBR was cancelled on the basis of our technical issue. My understanding is there were multiple registrars affected (not just ours) and ultimately CIRA had to make a tough decision. As I said in my original post, if Pool was found to be at fault, we would have taken our lumps and learned our lesson. Clearly this was not the case. Others were also affected.
"Instead they elect to post this load of BS believing that we are all idiots." I have been fortunate enough to meet many of my customers based in Canada and I can assure you I don't believe you "are all idots". There is no BS in my posting. Everything is factual. And I would hope that those of you who have met me would echo that I operate openly and with integrity.
"So Momentous is located in Ottawa as is CIRA." So is Sibername, and I suspect other registrars, who cares? If it's relevent, Sibername's offices are within walking distance of CIRA! Give me a break, our offices are in the same city somehow allows you to draw some kind of conclusion?
"What happened in the wee hiours of the night? Pool showed up at CIRA offices to "oversee the integrity of the session"?Or does pool have enough directors and staff at CIRA that they really don't need to show up as they are already there?" Neither Pool.com nor Momentous have any directors or staff at CIRA. And if you really want to know, I attended a rather disappointing hockey game last night. And my staff went home. There was nothing we could do to influence CIRA, they had communicated they would investigate the performance of the drop and publish the results which was fine with us. I found out the results this morning on arriving at my office. As stated elsewhere, if the decison was made to allow the TBR to stand, Pool.com would have taken its lumps and learned a lesson.
"Do other registrars know that while they believe they have a relationship with CIRA, they in fact have a relationship controlled and managed by Pool?" Where do you dream up this stuff? Are you really willing to be hauled in front of a judge to support these accusations?
"Webnames does not do much in TBR so it is not a factor here. But Pool is the major player and Pool controls CIRA." Pool controls CIRA? Really? How? Again, these wild accusations are blindingly false and I sure hope you have a good legal defence if you are ever asked by either CIRA or Pool.com to defend your accusations.
"And this whole ambiguity issue is such an insulting term to every one out there. All registrars from Burmac to Sibername managed to figure out the TBR without issue. Only Pool found it ambiguous?" Again, totally incorrect. According to CIRA, multiple registrars were affected, not just the registrars used by Pool.com. Is it fair to say that "most" registrars "figured it out"? Yes, I think so. But that fact that not all "figured it out" correctly suggests that the CIRA decision is correct.
"And then CIRA decides, to cancel?" Yes, despite knowing that their decision would in fact be seen/interpreted by some the way you are portraying it, they did the right thing! I am confident that any of the decision making trail would stand up to scrutiny and while you may not personally like the decision, I believe it was based on sound data and judgement and was indeed made after very careful consideration by CIRA.
"So in the end, the only party that matters is Pool. And again all registrars do not have a relationship with a transparent entity that treats all fairly and at arm length. They really have a relationship with Pool." Again the facts state that multiple registrars were affected, not just the ones used by Pool.com.
"The .ca domain namespace is a canadian asset. This is not a Pool asset. What transpired is nothing less than a travesty. How do we get IndustryCanada involved?" I would welcome any inquiry by Industry Canada rather than listen to more of your unfounded conjecture and wild accusations. Further, I hope you are prepared to stand up in a public court and defend your comments and accusations rather than rant and rave behind an alias that may or may not be traceable to a real person.
---------- Post added at 02:15 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:11 PM ----------
zoobar, you are right that the TBR ran last week but it did not run successfully allowing all registrars to submit command streams. You may recall there was an issue with IP addresses that inhibited some registrars from actually connecting to the process. You'd have to look at the CIRA announcements when it was shut down but as I recall, the shut down occurred just prior to the actual scheduled start time (or within a minute or two of the start possibly).
