The comittee should realise that the question Verisign poses about observed adverse effects, while interesting, is not as pertinent as it seems at first sight. John Klensin put it very well yesterday in a rigorous way. I'll offer a less rigorous but more graphical analogy: A contractor drills large holes in the central structural parts of a building to allow installation of their innovative garbage disposal. Civil engineers question the effects this has on the building's stability. The contractor's defense is: "Well it is still standing! How much work did those tenants really have patching up the holes to reduce the air drafts and stop the crackling noises?" Daniel
Daniel Karrenberg wrote:
A contractor drills large holes in the central structural parts of a building to allow installation of their innovative garbage disposal. Civil engineers question the effects this has on the building's stability. The contractor's defense is: "Well it is still standing! How much work did those tenants really have patching up the holes to reduce the air drafts and stop the crackling noises?"
Close :-) but a new garbage disposal in a building may still offer some benfits to the tenants. These wildcards did not. Keep 'em coming... Peter
Close :-) but a new garbage disposal in a building may still offer some benfits to the tenants. These wildcards did not.
Keep 'em coming... << How about this, you hire a company to manage your apartment complex and find they are using the property to run their own daily flee market, which pisses off all your tenants. Geo.
participants (3)
-
Daniel Karrenberg
-
Geo.
-
Peter Galbavy