RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au

RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au

From: Ginger Fish <ginger-fish§scifi-art.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 22:55:33 +1000
Jon,

Do you have any idea why the .au namespace hasn't been introduced at all as
a 2nd level ?

Ginger



-----Original Message-----
From: Jon Lawrence [mailto:jon&#167;jonlawrence.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:47 PM
To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au


so who gets magpies.footy.au?

Wests (NRL)?
Collingwood (AFL)?
Port Adelaide (SANFL)?
etc
etc?

I tend to agree with you that creating new 2LDs adds very little value to
the .au domain space.  Lets give id.au a go and see how it fares...much
the same as the recently released me.uk I suspect (ie noone wants them).

Also to the previous post suggesting that com.au is getting
overcrowded...with
<250,000 names?? come on...the .com space has over 20 million and people
are still registering madly...

The only potential change that I think could add value would be opening
up .au to registrations in the 2nd level - ie companyname.au, as our
American
friends are about to do in 75 minutes time.  I doubt companies that have
invested heavily in branding based on .com.au domains would agree,
however...

rgds
jon


>-- Original Message --
>Reply-To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>From: "Ginger Fish" <ginger-fish&#167;scifi-art.com>
>To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>
>Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 22:33:08 +1000
>Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>
>
>.. and as a joke but also true, i believe than in australia, .footy.au
would
>work damn good compare to anything.au ( except .com.au ) .... don't you
guys
>see a problem here ?
>
>Ginger
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ginger Fish [mailto:ginger-fish&#167;scifi-art.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 10:26 PM
>To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>
>
>Thanx Kevin, the state based 2TLD is indeed a very good start in the right
>direction.
>
>4 years ago when i was in France, the domain name administration decided
>to
>introduce the .tm.fr domain. It was supposed to mean "trademark" for
example
>if someone had already legally registered croissants.fr , another company
>with a trademarked name could registere croissants.tm.fr ... the result
was
>a total mess. they also tried their version of the .name.xxx that was
>.nom.fr ... the result was also a big failure.. When you need a domain
name,
>you need a real domain name, it's not worth spending money in a domain
name
>nobody will remember or that will sound or read ridiculous, in that case
>you'd better keep your geocities URL and bigpond email address, it makes
>things simple and you don't feel like you're being ripped off ..
>Don't get me wrong, i understand the need to expand with other extensions
>.... but I have always thought that doing the right thing is giving people
>what they want, not giving what a bunch of lawyers or IT executive that
>believe they know everything about the universe "think" is right ... Why
>not
>grabbing a few people in the street and put them in the comitee that is
>going to discuss that, take a few students, a few small business managers
>and ask them what they think would be cool , that would have the effect
of
>giving people what they really want and grow the domain name industry quite
>a bit ( and also give back a few colours to the AU Administration ) ...
it's
>already hard enough to explain anybody the difference between .com and
>.com.au, go try explaining why they SHOULD get a
>www.croissants.coop.sex.museum.skippy.meatpie.au domain name ....
>
>
>Ginger
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Kevin Fleming [mailto:kevin&#167;w617.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 9:51 PM
>To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>
>
>
>whilst the .com.au domain space seems to be coming congested - there are
>few
>legitimate openings for other 2TLDs. I'd hate to see the .au domain space
>fall into the same disrepute as the ICANN lead charge of .biz. My company
>spent thousands of dollars on lawyer fees for what? we don't even use the
>.biz - I'm not even sure it was fully finalised anyway. I've yet to see
a
>company use a .biz address in their marketing (anyone?).
>
>I agree with Ginger (not about the masterbating) that people have come
to
>accept .com.au and .com and maybe .net - if we add to the confusion with
>another dozen 2TLDs to the domain space then the Internet will all become
>too confusing. For legitimate businesses with an appropriate ACN etc there
>is little problem locating an appropriate domain under the existing rules.
>Sure - it's not as easy as it was 3 years ago - but that's business.
>
>My suggestion would be to add state based 2TLDs such as .qld.au and .nsw.au
>etc. A significant number of businesses that use the Internet only operate
>in their local area. They don't compete in the geographic market across
this
>country - why should they hog a domain name from someone they don't compete
>against?
>
>Kevin
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ginger Fish [mailto:ginger-fish&#167;scifi-art.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, 24 April 2002 7:47 PM
>> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>> Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>>
>>
>> The thing is, you'll soon discover that while we're masturbating
>> our brains
>> trying to find new extensions, people will only want to register .com
and
>> .com.au domain names... sure people register .biz domain names but hardly
>> use them, i still haven't seen a .bz being used as a business site (
if
>> anyone can point me to one i'd be grateful ) .. so do you guys
>> really think
>> a .law.au or .whatever.au is going to make a difference ? it will
>> only make
>> the name longer and it will take more time to write it or
>> memorize it , now
>> a .law is different, it's a GTLD that could have a purpose ( not
>> like stupid
>> .aero or .name ) let's face it, there is very little hope for success
with
>> other 2TLDs ( .sex.au or .gay.au excepted maybe and i am not kidding,
we
>> know THAT can be a success because there's a demand for it) .... .name.au
>> doesn't sound very sexy and attractive . it would be more
>> interesting to get
>> something like jon.lawrence.au but ( first in first served ) but
>> then again
>> that is a stupid idea because the auDA guys will get an internal
>> combustion
>> trying to manage such a headache ....
>>
>> Anyway, sorry, just my 2c   .....correct me if i'm wrong and if
>> you think i
>> have stupid ideas !
>>
>> Ginger
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: aussiewide.com (administration) [mailto:rebecca&#167;aussiewide.com]
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 7:30 PM
>> To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>> Subject: Re: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>>
>>
>> I dont care provided I can get .bitch
>>
>> Rebecca
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Jon Lawrence" <jon&#167;jonlawrence.com>
>> To: <dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au>; <dns§auda.org.au>
>> Cc: "'Grant Bayley'" <gbayley&#167;ausmac.net>
>> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2002 6:24 PM
>> Subject: RE: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>>
>>
>> Actually I think .biz reeks of ICANN's spinelessness.  If they'd been
>> willing
>> to give the internet community what it wanted it would have taken on
Image
>> Online Design and approved .web
>>
>>
>> >-- Original Message --
>> >Reply-To: dns&#167;lists.auda.org.au
>> >From: "Rowe, Joshua" <Joshua.Rowe&#167;auspost.com.au>
>> >To: "'Dns List (dns&#167;auda.org.au)'" <dns§auda.org.au>
>> >Cc: 'Grant Bayley' <gbayley&#167;ausmac.net>
>> >Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 18:03:47 +1000
>> >Subject: [DNS] RE: auDA to consider new names for .au
>> >
>> >
>> >Forwarded with Grant's permission.
>> >
>> >
>> >Josh
>> >--
>> >* any views are my own
>> >
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Grant Bayley [mailto:gbayley&#167;ausmac.net]
>> >Sent: Wednesday, 24 April 2002 5:35 PM
>> >To: Rowe, Joshua
>> >Cc: Link List (link&#167;www.anu.edu.au)
>> >Subject: Re: [LINK] auDA to consider new names for .au
>> >
>> >
>> >On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Rowe, Joshua wrote:
>> >
>> >> auDA to consider new names for .au
>> >> http://www.auda.org.au/about/news/2002042402.html
>> >
>> >[snip]
>> >
>> >> auDA is considering whether there is sufficient public support for
the
>> >
>> >> creation of some new 2LDs. For example, should auDA follow the example
>> >
>> >> of ICANN and create a new "biz.au" or "name.au"? Another option might
>>
>> >> be to create new 2LDs for specific sectors of the community, like
>> >> "law.au" for lawyers.
>> >
>> >I'll bite on this particular point.
>> >
>> >Anyone else think that ".biz" reeks of "1999 dot com excesses"?
>> >
>> >For this reason alone I'd assert that it's worth ignoring.
>> >
>> >> auDA is particularly interested in receiving proposals for the
>> >> existing info.au 2LD, which is currently inactive.
>> >>
>> >> "Now that the .info gTLD has commenced operation, we think there is
>> >> real potential for info.au to become a very popular domain among
>> >> Australian Internet users," said auDA CEO, Chris Disspain.
>> >
>> >This is mostly personal opinion, but the existing "new" TLDs have gotten
>> >a
>> >bad name for themselves, and mostly because of the process that was
>> followed
>> >to bring them into operation.  Firstly, the fact that preference
>> was given
>> >to those wanted to "reserve" / stake a claim to an existing name meant
>> that
>> >it was abused heavily by anyone that could convincingly lie about the
>> >trademarks/service marks etc that they held.  Secondly, the fact that
>> >spammers picked up the baton and ran with it for .biz/.info/.name meant
>> that
>> >by the time the domains eventually became available, there was such
>> >confusion and latent anger about having received 500 unsolicited email
>> >offers to "reserve" domains in the new TLDs, nobody cared about them.
>> >
>> >More personal opinion.  Who really wants a domain ending in .name?
>> >"john.smith.name"  That's got about as much appeal as a warm, mouldy
rag.
>> >Ditto on ".per" as a 2LD/TLD.  At the very least, an opening up of
.id.au
>> >without the 3LD requirement for an Australian animal ought to cater
for
>> the
>> >demand for personal domain names.
>> >
>> >As Chris has hinted at above, the only TLD/2LD's that strike me as
having
>> >any appeal are those that can be immediately used by organisations that
>> are
>> >part of a body of professionals or perhaps a club (.law, .club (?)),
>> >organisations that perform some historical, information aggregation
or
>> >archiving function (.museum, .archive (?)), or provide a clear
>> and obvious
>> >source of information on a particular topic (.info).
>> >
>> >Grant
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >
>> >Australia Post is committed to providing our customers with excellent
>> service.
>> > If we can assist you in any way please either telephone 13 13
>> 18 or visit
>> >our website www.auspost.com.au.
>> >
>> >CAUTION
>> >
>> >This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are privileged and
>> confidential
>> >information intended for the use of the addressee. The confidentiality
>> and/or
>> >privilege in this e-mail is not waived, lost or destroyed if it has
been
>> >transmitted to you in error. If you have received this e-mail in error
>> you
>> >must (a) not disseminate, copy or take any action in reliance on it;
(b)
>> >please notify Australia Post immediately by return e-mail to the sender;
>> >and (c) please delete the original e-mail.
>> >
>> >
>> >-----------------------------------------------------------------
>> ----------
>> >List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>> >Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
>> >
>> >author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------
>> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
>> author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------
>> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
>> author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>> ---------
>> List policy, unsubscribing and archives =>
>> http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>> Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of
the
>> author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>>
>>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
>author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
>author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
>List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
>Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
>
>author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
>



---------------------------------------------------------------------------
List policy, unsubscribing and archives => http://www.auda.org.au/list/dns/
Please do not retransmit articles on this list without permission of the
author, further information at the above URL.  (311 subscribers.)
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:05 UTC