[thelist] recommendation on new tlds (was:yahooligans + DI)

Hi Matt,
At 19:24 11.05.00 -0400, you wrote:
>Actually, I have made it common practice to buy the domain:
>membername-sucks-bigtim.com for every member on every discussion list I am
>on. This way, if anyone flames me (which never happens, of course) I have
>the opportunity to launch a first-class smear campaign with a dandy domain
>name. So, wolfgang, I already own that domain. Check the InterNIC whois. I'm
>sure I'll never use it or www.scott-dexter-sucks-bigtime.com, but who knows
>;-)

Ok, I am completely depending at your will.
How much money do you want? ;-)

>> What I find missing, and forgive me if someone already brought this up, is
>> the lack of top level domain (tld) enforcement. .Com, .net, .org, etc, all
>> have --though apparently completely ignored-- intended uses. The only ones

This is a good call- but even if it could be possible now to turn back time-
how is that to regulate?
What if the domain name first is essential to find a business later?
I have been through some discussion on that, and though I agree
that Scott has a valid point, we never came to conclusion how
to make it into practice.
If you continue this thought, NSI should be enforced to check
all name and other trademarks patent, before they hand out
a domain- imagine the costs of that added to the current domain
price- it would end as several thousands Dollars.

>NSI called .com criteria enforcement unmanageable... and I
>agree. But that is because there weren't enough specific tlds. Sites that
>met .net and .org specifications were few. .net and .org were opened up

>because .com was getting filled up. Again, a problem because there aren't
>enough tlds. If 15 tlds were introduced, it would become less beneficial to
>buy mycompany.* and net users would end up learning that there's more than
>.com.

But it would be filled up sooner or later as well, right?
I am not sure if opening new TLDs solves the problem really, but it would
be a start.

I think other country specific approaches are interesting.
UK for example has several sub-domains:
.co.uk second level domain For Commercial Enterprises 
.org.uk second level domain For Organizations 
.ltd.uk second level domain For UK Limited Companies 
.plc.uk second level domain For UK Public Limited Companies 
.net.uk second level domain For Internet Service Providers 
.sch.uk second level domain For UK Schools 
.ac.uk second level domain For Academic Establishments 
.gov.uk second level domain For Government Bodies 
.nhs.uk second level domain For NHS Organizations 
.police.uk second level domain For UK Police Forces 
.mod.uk second level domain For Ministry of Defence Establishments 

>I think .store or .shop are must-haves as far as new tlds are concerned.
>Other possibles I can think of off the top of my head are:
>
>.co                  unregistered "companies"
>.inc                 incorporated companies
>.corp                general corporations
>.law                 law sites (city/state/Fed laws, lawyers, law schools)
>.ref                 reference sites
>.art                 art-related sites... might even be too general
>.design or .dev      web dev.-relates sites, including firms
>.mail                hotmail.mail, etc.
>.isp                 Internet Service Providers and Hosting services
>.hobby
>.tut or .howto       I don't really like this -- tutorial/HOWTO sites
>.misc                catch-all

Interesting!

>Eventually, I hope to make a recommendation as DI on new tlds. Of course, I
>would insist on feedback from the Internet community before the
>recommendation. I am aware that there are similar recommendations, but they
>are moving slowly and I am not impressed by any of them. 

Good idea, could be a really good start for DI, also PR wise.

>The one that
>recommends/suggests .sucks is obviously driven by lawyers who want to see
>any increase in lawsuits.

I agree.

sorry folks, no tip I can think of today
.wolf