<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="">Just so I can get a prospective of how much money was lost for ARIN during this discussion</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>It doesn't matter how much money is lost. I never raised this point.</div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class="">I also note that at the time this holder received his resources, ARIN did not exist, nor was there any charge to receive resources and no discussion of any future charges for receiving numbers at the time when he received his numbers.</div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div><div>First, I'd like to say that this has been debated to death over the last two decades of ARIN's existence and every answer to your questions can be found in the archives. Oh look, here's a discussion about this exact topic A DECADE AGO where we went through the old forms in detail and nobody was able to document evidence that they were owed services: <a href="https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/2008-October/001071.html" class="">https://lists.arin.net/pipermail/arin-discuss/2008-October/001071.html</a></div><div><br class=""></div><div>If you want to argue this fresh, start by filling up on two decades of this discussion. People significantly more knowledgeable than you have tackled this.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>There have been above and beyond reasonable attempts to resolve all legitimate concerns, and all parties who had real issues with the contracts and services have resolved them and signed the contracts. Further, if he signed in 1993 then his contract says that it's governed by the laws of the US, and trust me there's laws about providing services, changes in services, etc etc and not a single one says you get to continue to receive services if you won't sign an updated contract. In fact you'll find considerably more precedence saying the opposite.</div><div><br class=""></div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class=""><div class=""> The charges by ARIN were done after the fact, and is it really fair to impose a charge under these conditions? There seems to be 2 sides to this issue.<br class=""></div></div></blockquote><div><br class=""></div>If he signed in 1993 as he said then he paid for "to coverf 2 years of charges" which is clear language that he may be expected to pay in the future.</div><div><br class=""></div><div>Pro tip: Don't argue this with people who still have the original forms at hand.</div><br class=""><div class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">-- <br class="">Jo Rhett<br class="">Net Consonance : net philanthropy to improve open source and internet projects.</div>
</div>
<br class=""></body></html>