Re: [DNS] domain names are old hat

Re: [DNS] domain names are old hat

From: Kim Davies <kim§>
Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 17:38:01 +0200
Quoting Adrian Kinderis on Sunday August 17, 2003:
| Before you all go getting a bee in you bonnet....

My humble opinion follows.. I don't have a bee in my bonnet, rather I am
a little bemused and also curious if this isn't all rather off target.

| 2. The site will have a different resolution on launch. I agree with the
| comments made on the list.

Make it resolution agnostic if that is a problem...

| 4. The term "webname" was chosen due to Market Research conducted by
| both AusRegistry and ARES. We are not trying to change the vernacular,
| merely introducing a linking noun that is a little more easily
| understood as to its purpose. Research like that shown in an early
| posting certainly supports this (thanks DPF!).

If the use of the term "domain name" is so objectionable, why not use
one of the other terms already in common use? As someone said, and in my
experience I would agree, "website address" is often a synonym. Yes, it
is not correct, but no more incorrect that what is proposed. I have
never heard anyone say "webname" before - and my immediate reaction
would probably be to do with an instant messenger nickname.

But that said, if the aim of the marketing campaign is educating the
consumer - I don't see why they are not educated properly with the
correct term rather than pseudo-nonsense. This sounds like the kind of
education where someone trying to teach people how a car works, starts
calling the motor engine the "vroom-machine".

| 5. We, AusRegistry have a marketing role as well as a technical one (as
| committed to in our tender document). We see this portal as being both
| educational and informative and yes, at times, this will seem self
| serving but ultimately, hopefully, beneficial to all.

I'd like to make a point, tangential to this website, but relates to
your "beneficial to all" comment.

For me, the success of .au is not strongly linked to the number of
domain names sold. For AusRegistry it is - they are there to make as
much money as they can over the next 3 years, and ultimately to try and
get in a position to secure the best possible advantage in a rebid for
the registry. That is a fact of life. For registrars it is all about
the money too - and thus number of registrations. For some that may be
directly through volume of registrations, for others it may not be at
all. It might just be a small but essential component of a much more
profitable part of their business.

But for everyone else, domain growth is not substantially important.
As a consumer, encouraging everyone to register as many domain names
as they can at this juncture in time actually harms others down the
track. It ultimately limits choice in a finite pool, by exhausting the
name supply. If in the year 2003, everyone is encouraged to register
variants, generics etc., what happens to all the new businesses in 2013?
This will always be a problem but that doesn't mean conservation efforts
are futile.

There are of course benefits to owning domain names, and educating the
public on those is extremely helpful, and I would like to see everyone
who would like to have one - have one. I would like to see ".au" to be
the viable choice for all Australians, and chosen in preference to other

I think we should be careful about using the number of domain
registrations and domain growth as the benchmark for success. It may be
for the shareholders of registries and registrars, but I am not sure who

I am not saying domain growth is a bad thing - it reflects positively
on work auDA has done to improve domain policy, on market deregulation,
in general Internet growth, and possibly even education improvements. I
also obviously acknowledge there are some consumer benefits through cost
reductions on a per-domain basis.

| 6. The website is not meant directly for you (DNS list members). The
| mere fact you are on this list indicates you have an advanced level of
| understanding. We are attempting to take domain names to a different
| audience. Therefore, we are catering for the IE browser people... how
| many people with a "limited" understanding of the internet do you think
| use "other" browsers? Don't tell me, we have done the math and it is not
| worth our time.

I am not sure if I agree with your argument, but even so, if it had been
thought through from the beginning it should have cost no more to do it
in a way that works reasonably well on other browsers.

| 7. Actually the domain name is "owned" by auDA. It is not an asset of
| AusRegistry. This was in response to our Registrars complaining that
| using was developing too much brand equity and
| giving us too much of a start for when(?) we lose the registry in 2006.
| We supported this sentiment and wanted auDA to have a neutral name that
| we could use that was also marketable (i.e. is a
| neutral name but no one has any idea as to what it is - for the same
| reason we get phone calls every day for people wanting to register a
| Marriage...). Therefore the name will stay with the Registry operator.

I think I was one of the people who called for any kind of neutral
education resource to not have a connection with the registry - but I
wouldn't have expected it to be called; and certainly
the ownership of the domain name seems to be about the only thing
distancing it from an AusRegistry touting exercise. If your aim was to
relieve a perceived connection to AusRegistry for the registrars, I'd
suggest a thorough redesign!

webname = hotstuff2003
Received on Fri Oct 03 2003 - 00:00:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sat Sep 09 2017 - 22:00:07 UTC