Autore: Rick Moen Data: To: dng Oggetto: Re: [DNG] Opennic
Quoting Gabe Stanton via Dng (dng@???):
> I'll be blunt as well. I think this argument is a strawman because you
> lumped opennic in with other dns providers and dismissed them....
That is not what I said.
Your reading comprehension isssues are not my problem.
> > > You made a case for another possibly good alternative for dns
> > > providers as oppposed to opennic
> >
> > That's not what I said.
>
> Uh okay. Here's the quote. If you weren't talking about a hypothetical
> alternative dns provider here, then I'm not the only one here that's
> confused.
I wasn't talking about OpenNIC _at all_, there.
I was pointing out that contractual privity gives one theoretical
legal advantages (but not very generally useful ones). I am not
responsible for your erroneous readings.
> You lumped opennic in with cisco, google, and various others is what
> you did.
I'm not sure where your misunderstandings are coming from, but I'm
really not interested.