Forum Moderators: buckworks & webwork

Message Too Old, No Replies

Is there a point to ".name"?

I mean really.

         

HughMungus

9:33 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Whose brilliant idea was this?

claus

9:36 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



My best guess is one with a very uncommon name.

Seriously the whole concept sucks - i've had registrars call me with all kinds of "attractive .names" but i've plainly refused. I mean, whoever thought about user expectations - ie. "com", or even "info" is something you can relate to, but name?

... so, i'm gonna see a webpage with my name on it or what? I don't need that, the user don't need that, nobody needs that.

richlowe

10:01 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



It's actually quite a good idea. Remember, .NAME is not intended for commercial use. It's intended for personal sites, and what better way to identify a personal site than your name?

encyclo

10:13 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



It's a terrible, silly idea. Didn't ICANN realize that there are quite a few users of the web who don't actually have English as their first language? .com, .net .org, .info are all "meaningful" not only in English but in a majority of western languages - and as none of them is a word, they remain generic enough for international use.

Dot name doesn't follow that pattern, and that makes it's usefulness very limited.

HughMungus

10:16 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



It's actually quite a good idea. Remember, .NAME is not intended for commercial use. It's intended for personal sites, and what better way to identify a personal site than your name?

I did not know that.

So are they going to allow ONLY real names to be registered?

The reason I think it's so silly is because whenever I think of domain names, I always ask myself, "How would this domain name sound if I were telling someone else about it verbally."

"Hey go check out my website at widgets.name!"

"What?"

"Dot N A M E"

"Huh?"

tedster

10:20 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Some people use the web for just fun and personal enjoyment - instead of profit and e-commerce. Imagine that! I ain't been there hardly never.

py9jmas

10:23 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



So are they going to allow ONLY real names to be registered?

I think the plan was to ensure people had to use real names in the form firstname.lastname.name. This would keep the hierarchy sane. However, people have sneeked all sorts of stuff past them, like "theman.withno.name".

The real reason for .name, and all the new generic TLDs, is to make money.

claus

10:27 pm on Jul 17, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



>> what better way to identify a personal site than your name

Blog format, "about me" pages, personal pictures, all kinds of stuff. It's the content that makes the site personal, not the ".name".

Most names are shared by several thousands of individuals, and the web is worldwide. Still makes no sense to me, it's childish at best..... "i'm the real John Doe, 'coz i got john.doe.name and you haven't"

postmaster

12:30 pm on Jul 18, 2004 (gmt 0)



I've had a lot of good feedback from people who use the .Name gTLD.

tedster

1:05 pm on Jul 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



I agree, postmaster, there can be some useful (and even clever) uses for .name. But at least for the moment, it is a bit of a "backwater" if you will.

I'll bet the entire terrain of the more recently introduced TLDs shifts significantly over, say, the next five years.

blaze

1:12 pm on Jul 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



.name is particularly stupid because there are millions of people who happen to share the same name as someone else.

If it was for personal websites, it should be .personal or something perhaps a bit shorter.

Hunter

8:20 pm on Jul 18, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Some people may want one for email.

richlowe

1:30 am on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



To those who think of the internet as dollar signs, .NAME makes no sense.

But the internet didn't start that way, and there are quite a few (millions upon millions) of personal web sites which were created out of love or a desire to communicate or some other motivation than money. These are what .NAME is for.

For the non-english among us, there is work going on (for the entire domain name system) to allow different character sets in domain names. I believe it is scheduled to go live in a year or two.

postmaster

2:56 am on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)



I saw the .bz domain when it first went live. it implements different characters. When the .Name domains first came out I also felt that it was stupid yet i registered 6 of them. Now the .name is available in the second level for individuals which makes it a lot more like a personal "dot com".

Teknorat

6:51 am on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



Sorry but the whole idea is stupid. I don't know even one person who wants one of these. Most people put a lot of effort into maintaining privacy on the web. Having your name spread across a URL does not help. THis is clearly just a way for ICANN to say I CANN GET MORE OF YOUR MONEY.

blaze

7:29 am on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Nah, if that were true than I think it would be a good idea.

Unfortunately, I doubt anyone's going to pay for it.

It's just dumb dumb dumb.

Hunter

7:59 am on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Lot's of things for sale on or for the Internet are dumb, what's your point?

choster

2:10 pm on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



Exactly, I don't understand the hostility in this thread. If you don't want one, don't buy one. I have one, I think it is a lot more useful than .aero or .museum personally.

Leosghost

2:21 pm on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



.aero or .museum

are restricted ...like in theory at least .org was supposed to be ...
agreed tho silly suffixes can only get worse ...about the only one that might releive some pressure would be three x'ses ( I actually typed the same character three times and the bbs changed it to four asterisks ..didn't realise ..must reread tos ..neat trick Brett ..! )

<begin utopian dream:subsection 24>
Then enforce it so all the pron couldn't be anywhere else and we could all config our browsers so our kids couln't get it ..

</end utopian dream:subsection 24>

esllou

2:53 pm on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



read on the Beeb last year that they were trying to corral all the pron sites into the three-X domain extension...it is stated policy at least by some who control these things

py9jmas

3:42 pm on Jul 19, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



The triple-x TLD proposals have always been turned down. In fact, there's a RFC all about why it's a bad idea. Dig out RFC3675 ".sex Considered Dangerous" from your favourite RFC site.

Teknorat

12:26 am on Jul 21, 2004 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member



That's an awesome utopian dream you got there. I think the triple x domain name would work well.

postmaster

5:00 am on Jul 22, 2004 (gmt 0)



This thread is getting very interesting and predictiable. Especially amongst the naysayers. I do agree that there is a certain degree of instability amongst the powers that be(icann, wipo, etc..). But really, there's something for everyone out here. What you might think is a bunk idea, another person out there might just have what it takes to turn that idea in to something great. We've witnessed it all before. The internet in itself is one for the records. I choose to embrace technology and find the good in everything over the bad. My motto is that sometimes the best way to predict the future is to create it, and in a lot of ways I have done this for others and for myself.

[edited by: tedster at 6:15 am (utc) on July 22, 2004]

Leosghost

10:22 am on Jul 22, 2004 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month



Postmaster ..literacy is nice ...so is mystery ...we may have even done some of the same chemicals ..but I miss your point ....
A little less "oracle at deplhi"...s'il tu plait ;)