Although it was obviously not a success, I kind of liked the idea behind the strict format. As an open domain extension, it makes very little sense. Who would want to have "pmorgan.name", which they give as an example? The ".name" part loses all meaning, since any other domain is a "name" in the same sense as well, there's no reason the state that in the extension.
It seems their concept was too unconventional for widespread use. The email addresses would have worked, but people aren't used to a no-www, dot in the middle domain.
I still think it's a shame.
I know that this post is not very productive, but maybe all those questions are reasons for the failure. I always thought that this might be more appealing to English speakers, but it seems that not even you guys liked .name
robert
.name...... not my thing. maybe no.
However, this "opening up" is pretty nonsensical -- if y.name is so demanded for, surely someone would have already grabbed one of the many possible x.y.name and therefore made y.name not available come Jan 14.
