Verisign's public opinion play
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet. In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
Wish someone who was good with the clue-axe would take a swing at these dolts. We all know they are crying babies because their new method of profit was shut down. Now, the interesting question will be, how can we prevent them from adding sitefinder again? -------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kee Hinckley" <nazgul@somewhere.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:12 PM Subject: Verisign's public opinion play
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to
regulate
everyone else's.
At 11:15 PM -0400 10/6/03, Brian Bruns wrote:
Wish someone who was good with the clue-axe would take a swing at these dolts.
We all know they are crying babies because their new method of profit was shut down.
Now, the interesting question will be, how can we prevent them from adding sitefinder again?
/* begin Karnak the Magnificent soothsaying Next, they will put an "improvement" into reverse DNS. Whenever there's no corresponding domain, it will take you to rednifetis.com. Baghdad Bob, fresh from "there is no tank behind me", will be the new spokesman. /* end sooth You know, I almost looked to see if rednifetis.com is assigned, and decided I don't want to know.
I wish it were lack of clue. This is something far more evil than lack of clue, and, the bottom line is that these guys are much better at PR than most of us. Since they can't win on engineering, because they are wrong, they are trying to make it a PR battle instead. They are having some success. We _MUST_ fight this as a PR battle. We _MUST_ write courteous, prompt, and, factual replies to these publications. The more people who do that, the better our side will look. We must point out where Verisign is lying, and, we must concede where they are not. We must clarify where their technically accurate statements lead to wildly inaccurate perceptions. Owen --On Monday, October 6, 2003 23:15 -0400 Brian Bruns <bruns@2mbit.com> wrote:
Wish someone who was good with the clue-axe would take a swing at these dolts.
We all know they are crying babies because their new method of profit was shut down.
Now, the interesting question will be, how can we prevent them from adding sitefinder again?
-------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kee Hinckley" <nazgul@somewhere.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:12 PM Subject: Verisign's public opinion play
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to
regulate
everyone else's.
Well, I donno about anyone else, but I absolutely suck on the PR end of things. Now, I *am* good at writing documentation for end users (I used to work helldesk). So, my question is, is there any place on the web where we can go, see whats been written up so far, find out what still needs to be written, and get people to fill in the blanks? I know personally I would love to put out a paper, but I have no idea where to begin. -------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Owen DeLong" <owen@delong.com> To: "Brian Bruns" <bruns@2mbit.com>; <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 2:00 AM Subject: Re: Verisign's public opinion play
I wish it were lack of clue. This is something far more evil than lack of clue, and, the bottom line is that these guys are much better at PR than most of us. Since they can't win on engineering, because they are wrong, they are trying to make it a PR battle instead. They are having some success. We _MUST_ fight this as a PR battle. We _MUST_ write courteous, prompt, and, factual replies to these publications. The more people who do that, the better our side will look. We must point out where Verisign is lying, and, we must concede where they are not. We must clarify where their technically accurate statements lead to wildly inaccurate perceptions.
Owen
--On Monday, October 6, 2003 23:15 -0400 Brian Bruns <bruns@2mbit.com> wrote:
Wish someone who was good with the clue-axe would take a swing at these dolts.
We all know they are crying babies because their new method of profit
was
shut down.
Now, the interesting question will be, how can we prevent them from adding sitefinder again?
-------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kee Hinckley" <nazgul@somewhere.com> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:12 PM Subject: Verisign's public opinion play
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to
accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
Innovation and the Internet http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html is about 12 hours old on google news -Henry Brian Bruns <bruns@2mbit.com> wrote: Well, I donno about anyone else, but I absolutely suck on the PR end of things. Now, I *am* good at writing documentation for end users (I used to work helldesk). So, my question is, is there any place on the web where we can go, see whats been written up so far, find out what still needs to be written, and get people to fill in the blanks? I know personally I would love to put out a paper, but I have no idea where to begin. -------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Owen DeLong" To: "Brian Bruns" ; Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 2:00 AM Subject: Re: Verisign's public opinion play
I wish it were lack of clue. This is something far more evil than lack of clue, and, the bottom line is that these guys are much better at PR than most of us. Since they can't win on engineering, because they are wrong, they are trying to make it a PR battle instead. They are having some success. We _MUST_ fight this as a PR battle. We _MUST_ write courteous, prompt, and, factual replies to these publications. The more people who do that, the better our side will look. We must point out where Verisign is lying, and, we must concede where they are not. We must clarify where their technically accurate statements lead to wildly inaccurate perceptions.
Owen
--On Monday, October 6, 2003 23:15 -0400 Brian Bruns
wrote:
Wish someone who was good with the clue-axe would take a swing at these dolts.
We all know they are crying babies because their new method of profit
was
shut down.
Now, the interesting question will be, how can we prevent them from adding sitefinder again?
-------------------------- Brian Bruns The Summit Open Source Development Group Open Solutions For A Closed World / Anti-Spam Resources http://www.2mbit.com ICQ: 8077511 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kee Hinckley" To: Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 11:12 PM Subject: Verisign's public opinion play
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to
accept
responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
The one that pisses me off more is http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5087139.html?tag=nefd_top The article makes me wonder if CNET is the press, or an outlet for press releases. The Internet community is almost uniform in expressing outrage for numerous REAL reasons, yet CNET says its from the Internet's technical "old guard".... Sorry, so where is the "new guard" calling for Verisign to come back with sitefinder ? Also CNET leaves un challenged the 'excuse of the day' that Verisign without site finder "will not be able to protect the Net's critical infrastructure"... ---Mike At 11:12 PM 06/10/2003, Kee Hinckley wrote:
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Mike Tancsa wrote:
The one that pisses me off more is
"Lewis said the company needs to make money from new services such as SiteFinder, or it will not be able to protect the Net's critical infrastructure. He cited a hacker's attack on the domain name system last year, in which VeriSign servers remained relatively unscathed--largely because of the 'substantial amount of capital we've had to invest,' he said." I propose we make it easier for everyone and first of all Verisign and relocate "Net's critical infrastrastructure" away from Verisign and let others who have shown to be just as good at handling these complex issues without compromising "Net's critical infrastructure" in order to promote its own commercial goals. P.S. Blood pressure medicine is not enough, after reading these two articles from CNET, I'm now sick to my stomach... Are we really going to let Verisign play this corporate interest misinformation compaign in the media like that? I don't want the rest of the net ending up like netscape (corporation, not the browser software), especially considering such a clear parallels between Verisign and Microsoft.
At 11:12 PM 06/10/2003, Kee Hinckley wrote:
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments). -- Kee Hinckley http://www.messagefire.com/ Next Generation Spam Defense http://commons.somewhere.com/buzz/ Writings on Technology and Society
I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.
----- Original Message ----- From: <william@elan.net> To: <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, October 06, 2003 10:04 PM Subject: Re: Verisign's public opinion play
its own commercial goals.
P.S. Blood pressure medicine is not enough, after reading these two articles from CNET, I'm now sick to my stomach... Are we really going to let Verisign play this corporate interest misinformation compaign in the media like that? I don't want the rest of the net ending up like netscape (corporation, not the browser software), especially considering such a clear parallels between Verisign and Microsoft.
How much money from each .com/.net registration goes to Verisign for gtld-servers? I thought it was a couple of dollars anyway. I find it hard to believe that Verisign is not making a profit (not that that is a bad thing since they are playing that angle) off of this. I'm sure there are plenty of other entities that would be happy to do this service for the money they get for it. If the firestorm Verisign ignited burns down their own house I don't think there will be many people crying. Note to Verisign - now is the time to slink home with your tail between your legs. Keep fanning the flames any you might find out that this 'vocal minority' is capable of creating considerable blowback. Mark Radabaugh Amplex (419) 720-3635
An entity claiming to be Mike Tancsa (mike@sentex.net) wrote: : : : The one that pisses me off more is : : http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5087139.html?tag=nefd_top : Here's an interesting slip: At the press conference Monday, VeriSign said it is convening a panel of Internet experts to evaluate the technical fallout from its change. Are they saying that they had neglected to evaluate the impact before they inserted the wildcard? Mark -- [] Mark 'Doc' Rogaski | Consistency requires you to be as [] wendigo@pobox.com | ignorant today as you were a year ago. [] 1994 Suzuki GS500ER | -- Bernard Berenson [] 1975 Yamaha RD250B |
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:41:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
The one that pisses me off more is
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5087139.html?tag=nefd_top
The article makes me wonder if CNET is the press, or an outlet for press releases. The Internet community is almost uniform in expressing outrage for numerous REAL reasons, yet CNET says its from the Internet's technical "old guard".... Sorry, so where is the "new guard" calling for Verisign to come back with sitefinder ? Also CNET leaves un challenged the 'excuse of the day' that Verisign without site finder "will not be able to protect the Net's critical infrastructure"...
From the bottom of those CNET articles: Contact us: http://news.com.com/2040-1096_3-0.html
Couldn't hurt to try... Also, Declan's articles on Sept. 16 was most definitely not a Verisign press release, see: http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5077530.html?tag=st_rn Steve
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:24:08PM -0700, Steve Feldman wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:41:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
The one that pisses me off more is
From the bottom of those CNET articles: Contact us: http://news.com.com/2040-1096_3-0.html
Couldn't hurt to try...
Also, Declan's articles on Sept. 16 was most definitely not a Verisign press release, see: http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5077530.html?tag=st_rn
Maybe he would be willing to help draft (or at least edit) a response from the community at large. I do agree with other posters that a response is in order, and I think it's important that it's concise, reasonable, well written, and focuses on the main issues at hand. While this list is not the place to create such a response, I imagine someone could throw together an open list to create one. It's true that the majority of the people on this list are not PR or marketing people, and that's why it's important that we respond, and respond in a way that's easy for the general public to understand. It might also be a good idea to try to get some opinions from non-technical people; most of the non-technical people I've spoken to also find SiteFinder annoying and / or confusing. -- "Since when is skepticism un-American? Dissent's not treason but they talk like it's the same..." (Sleater-Kinney - "Combat Rock")
I think this list may be a very good choice of where to construct such a response. This is certainly an issue requiring coordination, and, the results of this PR battle definitely have strong operational ramifications. As such, I believe it EXACTLY fits the charter of this list, while, being a bit outside it's traditional subject matter. Owen --On Monday, October 6, 2003 23:46 -0700 Will Yardley <william+nanog@hq.dreamhost.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:24:08PM -0700, Steve Feldman wrote:
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:41:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
The one that pisses me off more is
From the bottom of those CNET articles: Contact us: http://news.com.com/2040-1096_3-0.html
Couldn't hurt to try...
Also, Declan's articles on Sept. 16 was most definitely not a Verisign press release, see: http://news.com.com/2100-1032_3-5077530.html?tag=st_rn
Maybe he would be willing to help draft (or at least edit) a response from the community at large. I do agree with other posters that a response is in order, and I think it's important that it's concise, reasonable, well written, and focuses on the main issues at hand. While this list is not the place to create such a response, I imagine someone could throw together an open list to create one.
It's true that the majority of the people on this list are not PR or marketing people, and that's why it's important that we respond, and respond in a way that's easy for the general public to understand.
It might also be a good idea to try to get some opinions from non-technical people; most of the non-technical people I've spoken to also find SiteFinder annoying and / or confusing.
-- "Since when is skepticism un-American? Dissent's not treason but they talk like it's the same..." (Sleater-Kinney - "Combat Rock")
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:41:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote:
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5087139.html?tag=nefd_top The article makes me wonder if CNET is the press, or an outlet for press releases. The Internet community is almost uniform in expressing outrage for numerous REAL reasons, yet CNET says its from the Internet's technical "old guard".... Sorry, so where is the "new guard" calling for Verisign to come back with sitefinder ? Also CNET leaves un challenged the 'excuse of the day' that Verisign without site finder "will not be able to protect the Net's critical infrastructure"...
We've been covering the impact of SiteFinder since September 16. I didn't write that article (I was in transit from a conference in Canada) but I've written about five articles on SiteFinder so far, and I'll probably write another today based on the ICANN committee meeting. Taken as a whole, I hardly think our coverage of SiteFinder is an "outlet for press releases" from VeriSign or anyone else. Take a look at our first article from September 16: http://news.com.com/2100-1032-5077530.html
Criticism is quickly growing over VeriSign's surprise decision to take control of all unassigned .com and .net domain names, a move that has wreaked havoc on many e-mail utilities and antispam filters. On Monday, VeriSign began to redirect domain lookups for misspelled or nonexistent names to its own site, a process that has confused Internet e-mail utilities and drawn angry denunciations of the company's business practices from frustrated network administrators. The Mountain View, Calif.-based company enjoys a government-granted monopoly as the master database administrator for .com and .net.
That said, being a news organization (instead of an advocacy organization) means that we're going to try to represent all sides of the story. Just as we've given space to Jack Valenti, I suspect we'll give it to VeriSign when they have something sufficiently newsworthy to say. As always, feel free to email us at: send-letters-to-news at cnet.com I hope you continue to read News.com. Best, Declan CNET News.com Washington, DC (but speaking only for myself)
At 05:55 PM 07/10/2003, Declan McCullagh wrote:
http://news.com.com/2100-1038_3-5087139.html?tag=nefd_top The article makes me wonder if CNET is the press, or an outlet for press releases. The Internet community is almost uniform in expressing outrage for numerous REAL reasons, yet CNET says its from the Internet's technical "old guard".... Sorry, so where is the "new guard" calling for Verisign to come back with sitefinder ? Also CNET leaves un challenged the 'excuse of the day' that Verisign without site finder "will not be able to protect
On Mon, Oct 06, 2003 at 11:41:14PM -0400, Mike Tancsa wrote: the
Net's critical infrastructure"...
We've been covering the impact of SiteFinder since September 16. I didn't write that article (I was in transit from a conference in Canada) but I've written about five articles on SiteFinder so far, and I'll probably write another today based on the ICANN committee meeting.
Hi, I think *your* articles are well done and are researched. However, I stand by my original criticism that this particular article was merely reporting one perspective on the issue in such as way as to make it appear as if it were a conduit for Verisign PR IMHO. The "old guard" label is a loaded term and smacks of judgement by your writer. Not quite calling it a "fringe group" or "special interest group" yet "old guard" vs "the network operators who run the Internet" certainly have different connotations. Similarly, this repeating of Verisign claim as fact that its a minority of people who disagree with sitefinder and how it was launched is particularly maddening. Sorry, is there some alt NANOG group out there secretly saying that "gee, this site finder is great! Why didnt they do it before?" Or perhaps on a-slashdot, or a-IAB ?
I hope you continue to read News.com.
I will continue to read your articles but in general my estimate of news.com has dropped significantly. ---Mike
"For this vocal minority, resentment lingers at the very fact that the Internet is used for commercial purpose, which ignores the fact that it's a critical part of our economy." So verisign admit its about the $$$s then? Sticking on the commercial argument claim which this argument is about, Verisign also fails to mention that it is only the keeper of the registry and it is being uncompetitive by allowing its registrar business to benefit at the exclusion of the many other registrars. Steve On Mon, 6 Oct 2003, Kee Hinckley wrote:
Take your blood pressure medicine before reading this one. http://news.com.com/2010-1071-5086769.html Apparently our objections stem from our lingering resentment over the commercial use of the internet.
In case you're wondering who the author is, since neither the bio on the page or Verisign's site is helpful. Mark McLaughlin is a former lawyer who moved into Marketing and Biz Development (Caere, Gemplus, Signio and then Verisign payments).
participants (13)
-
Brian Bruns -
Declan McCullagh -
Henry Linneweh -
Howard C. Berkowitz -
Kee Hinckley -
Mark Radabaugh -
Mark Rogaski -
Mike Tancsa -
Owen DeLong -
Stephen J. Wilcox -
Steve Feldman -
william+nanog＠hq.dreamhost.com -
william＠elan.net