Quoting Gabe Stanton via Dng (dng@lists.dyne.org): > 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. _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
