Patrick Vande Walle wrote:
I think the main answer here - before being one of ICANN or ALAC doing something - is to educate the customers/consumers that they have the option to spend their USD9.99/yr with another registrar.
This, of course, assumes that consumers are capable of making an informed decision. It is easy to compare "features", but impossible for consumers to shop based on ethics, compliance, or the likelihood that something 'unexpected' will happen.
I would very much prefer the ALAC to spend time on policies, rather than address specific cases of dumb customers. I don't see the ALAC as a complaints dept.
As has been said before, it is agreed that ALAC does not have the resources to act on individual complaints; but it does have a role ensuring that complaints are dealt with fairly and -- more importantly -- that pattens of abuse are identified. If all you want to do is churn policy, go join the GNSO. ALAC's mandate deliberately extends to *everything* about ICANN. Limiting ALAC to policy matters is an unacceptable abdication of responsibility. And... by the way... I take offense to the characterization of "dumb customers". Such arrogant elitism has no place within an organization charged with representing the world of Internet end-users.
I also note most of the concerns against registrars are mostly for US-based ones. Maybe there are some factors exterior to ICANN, weak consumer protection laws for example, that allow US-based registrars to do things that others don't.
Or maybe only the Americans are the only ones being watched?
I would very much welcome that consumer organizations come up with a comparative analysis of registrars, both in terms of contracts and services offered. This would certainly help consumers find their way around in the domain registration jungle.
Within ICANN, ALAC is *the* consumer protection organization, by definition. There is nobody else to delegate to. - Evan