Re: [wg-c] more on non-shaired gTLDs

[Rick H Wesson <wessorh@ar.com>]

Kent,


On Mon, 20 Mar 2000, Kent Crispin wrote:


> > your suggestions assume that the registrant population could be
> > controlled requiring some gTLDs to restrict whom might register under it.
> 
> Nope.  "Control" is not a necessary factor.  Chartered or not, enforced 
> or not, controlled or not, .museum isn't going to have as many 
> registrations as .shop, .info, .web, or even .nom.


I could see sex.museum and fuck.museum and my.museum being quite usefull.

infact if there are lots of places that have sparse use they will be
picked up by folks looking for a return or folks looking for cool new
names that are not available in anyother gTLD.

  a) I wouldn't consider any dictionary word generic
  b) just about all dictionary words will end up registered as SLDs in
     any new gTLDs created.

assuming that a new gTLD wil be underutilized IMHO just doesn't jive with 
what the names market is currently experencing. 

There are 214,000 definitions in  Merriam-Webster's Dictionary. There are
more than 214,000 domain registrations in com/net/org gTLD each week.



-rick