[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [wg-c] With apologies, Bill Semich's Position on New gTLDs
>> That main issue is not *how many* new gTLDs to introduce, but *how to*
>> introduce new gTLDs (which goes back to the question of "Why does the
>> public need new gTLDs?")
The public needs 'new gTLDs' for the simple fact that all the
.com/.net/.org/.co.uk etc domains will be gone soon and there will be
non left for 'the general' public to register
>> So please don't count me in your consensus for adding 6-10 new gTLDs,
>> unless we all first agree under what terms or procedures such new gTLDs
>> will be created and operating.
Personnaly i think more than 10 gTLDs should be introduced as a wise
man once said - 'you can't have to much of a good thing'
KC> Personally, I also favor chartered TLDs. The argument for more
KC> "open" gTLDs is that they will provide more competition (for
KC> NSI), and I think that a set of half a dozen new open gTLDs might
KC> do that. But it seems to me that if you add many more than that
KC> they won't compete with NSI, they will compete with each other for
KC> a tiny market share.
I think that other domains should also go on testing etc like a .uk on
its own(e.g. www.mydomain.uk).
Heres a question to all you out there do you think companys like http://www.nomination.net/
should be stoped from registering domains as they sell sub domains of
them and spoiling it for the rest of us, letme know what u think