Nominet announces programme for evolving the .uk domain name space

[GreyWing]

How is a vote likely to turn out? How many people voting have clear conflicts of interest, i.e. being linked to domain registrars etc.

When I have spoken to large registrars in the past, quite pro .uk but not brand confusion. Even though they would benefit, they were really understanding and independent of proposed personal gain.

£10-£20 per domain also actually means less sales for them, not more. So they were also against it on those grounds as well.

 

[Retired_Member38]

When I have spoken to large registrars in the past, quite pro .uk but not brand confusion. Even though they would benefit, they were really understanding and independent of proposed personal gain.

£10-£20 per domain also actually means less sales for them, not more. So they were also against it on those grounds as well.

How much of the vote do domain registrars control? Brand confusion or not, I would expect them all to vote in a self serving way and go for the new extension. I can't see any realistic way that it would result in less revenue for them, and I can't see any realistic way that a big company would do anything other than make a vote that suited them best, at the expense of others.

 

[GreyWing]

The Big Number Change (switch on 22nd April 2000) introduced inconsistencies in the dialling codes of several cities in the UK (Cardiff, Coventry, London, Northern Island, Portsmouth and Southampton). All of those locations moved to 8 digit local numbers and many gained a dialling code beginning 02 instead of 01. The public did and continue to cope with it.

(from iPhone)

I'm not 100% sure that they do tbh, not completely anyway, the majority did yep, I know some people thought that 03 etc were premium rates and didn't ring or answer them for a while. I remember the stories at the time of that. I'll try and dig them out.

 

[websaway]

Yes, thousands of times less rational.

It is possible to put together scenarios where ".uk" makes some kind of sense. In some scenarios, it makes quite a reasonable amount of success.

It is impossible to defend, on a commercially rational basis, any scenario where .co.uk is scrapped entirely.

Great, so give us the end game scenario where .uk makes sense to the business community and the UK webspace.
( avoid the worst of two evils scenario )

 

[GreyWing]

I cannot think why as 03 has only recently reopened (there were once mobile numbers beginning with 03 - my first did - but that hasn't been the case since the late 1990s). There were also LoCall 0345 numbers for a while but they became 0845. 03 is also non-geographic and my previous post was purely about geographic numbers. Non-geographic numbers are a different kettle of fish and are currently subject to further consultations and future improvements, in order to simplify the understanding of charge bands.


(from iPhone)

I was thinking that the 03 was the 2000 change, I was wrong mate. My head is frazzeled today Was thinking it wasn't 13 years ago I read the stories, but time does move fast. I don't recall if any problems over the 02 number change off hand.

 

[Edwin]

What doesn't stand up to scrutiny is why all the arguments made about confusion / rebranding etc. now suddenly don't mater in light of the new release mechanism were trademark holders no longer get first shout.

They do matter. As far as I can see, there are a lot of differences of opinion on this thread, and one kinda-sorta-consensus. That consensus is: it would be better not to launch .uk at all.

People said that after V1, and they're still saying after V2.

However, it's then prudent to go beyond that baseline and work on the "it IS happening" scenario to get the fairest outcome in that case.

And once you move to consider the "it IS happening" scenario, it is undeniable that V2 is better than V1. Could it be refined further? Maybe. That's the point of much of the discussion in this thread.

 

[Edwin]

Great, so give us the end game scenario where .uk makes sense to the business community and the UK webspace.
( avoid the worst of two evils scenario )

I already did, at great length and in detail, in response to V1
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ukpositionpaper.pdf

 

[GreyWing]

And once you move to consider the "it IS happening" scenario, it is undeniable that V2 is better than V1. Could it be refined further? Maybe. That's the point of much of the discussion in this thread.

I can deny it mate and heard a few others question it, I personally think v1 was better than v2 regarding the release mechanism. But that is hardly any compliment to version 1. They both are flawed with winners and losers.

 

[scooter]

The majority of peoples focus here has completely changed since Nominet brought out their new proposal.




You have all given up. It is not over yet. Why are you not fighting for what you were fighting for originally. No new commercial namespace.




It does not make commercial sense to have 2 commercial competing namespaces within the UK.



What is being suggested now is co.uk will not die. It will last as long as the lifetime of the co.uk registration uptake and the registrant will receive the .uk.




But there will not be any new registrations. All new registrations will be .UK only. This way commercial equilibrium is kept.




A seemless transition on to .uk commercial namespace.













.

 

[websaway]

I already did, at great length and in detail, in response to V1
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ukpositionpaper.pdf

That leaves us in this position:

Post d day .uk
I will not register a co.uk without registering the equivalent .uk (probably have to go for the hyphen for both aswell to protect the position)
Additional costs for me but only the one site built.


If I just register the .uk or the co.uk then the very next day someone will register the one I have not got with a view to sell it to me at a future date and will park it listing it for sale, the more successful my site becomes the more the value of the alternative name rises.

How does that benefit the business community or the UK webspace ?

 

[Edwin]

The majority of peoples focus here has completely changed since Nominet brought out their new proposal.

You have all given up. It is not over yet. Why are you not fighting for what you were fighting for originally. No new commercial namespace.

It is easy to fight against an opponent who sets themself up for a defeat by producing a crazy proposal (V1) that can be shown very quickly to be fatally flawed.

It's harder to fight something that appears much more rational (even if imperfect) and which will consequently stand up to external scrutiny (media, small biz etc.) much better.

That's not to suggest for one moment that it's not WORTH fighting, but I think the overwhelming improvement from V1 to V2 (in most people's eyes - I know not all) may have knocked the wind from the sails a little...

 

[Edwin]

That leaves us in this position:

Post d day .uk
I will not register a co.uk without registering the equivalent .uk (probably have to go for the hyphen for both aswell to protect the position)
Additional costs for me but only the one site built.


If I just register the .uk or the co.uk then the very next day someone will register the one I have not got with a view to sell it to me at a future date and will park it listing it for sale, the more successful my site becomes the more the value of the alternative name rises.

How does that benefit the business community or the UK webspace ?

It is pointless to argue against my position paper by saying ".uk shouldn't go ahead". I think that too!

My position paper was/is intended to provide a "least unacceptable" way forward, should the attempts to stop it going ahead fail.

 

[GreyWing]

It is pointless to argue against my position paper by saying ".uk shouldn't go ahead". I think that too!

My position paper was/is intended to provide a "least unacceptable" way forward, should the attempts to stop it going ahead fail.

But it is only least unacceptable to domainers because wins and losses balance themselves out over a portfolio..... members of the public have one domain, the loss of that domain name, or more correctly the arrival of a competitor on a superior business platform could mean end of business.

That's how I see it from the public's point of view.

 

[websaway]

It is pointless to argue against my position paper by saying ".uk shouldn't go ahead". I think that too!

My position paper was/is intended to provide a "least unacceptable" way forward, should the attempts to stop it going ahead fail.

No Edwin the question was:

how does the following end game position of your proposals for .uk benefit the business community or the UK webspace.
(Ignoring the worst of two evils scenario that you are hooked on)


Post d day .uk
I will not register a co.uk without registering the equivalent .uk (probably have to go for the hyphen for both aswell to protect the position)
Additional costs for me but only the one site built.


If I just register the .uk or the co.uk then the very next day someone will register the one I have not got with a view to sell it to me at a future date and will park it listing it for sale, the more successful my site becomes the more the value of the alternative name rises.

How does that benefit the business community or the UK webspace ?

 

[Edwin]

But it is only least unacceptable to domainers because wins and losses balance themselves out over a portfolio..... members of the public have one domain, the loss of that domain name, or more correctly the arrival of a competitor on a superior business platform could mean end of business.

It's not "least unacceptable" to domainers. Domainers would benefit more from the ".co.uk automatically gets it" scenario. But that stiffs non-profits and others who have legitimate interests.

 

[GreyWing]

But that stiffs non-profits and others who have legitimate interests.

I don't think it does, I own Donate.org.uk, I don't want it on .uk. .org.uk is what gives it its meaning.

 

[retired_member36]

The full thing is bollocks just like the people who thought of the idea in my oppinion

 

[Retired_Member42]

The full thing is bollocks just like the people who thought of the idea in my oppinion

Don't hold back, say what you really think

 

[GreyWing]

Don't hold back, say what you really think

He's my new Barrister for the High Court..

 

[monaghan]

To clarify my actual point. Do we value having the second level element because it provides an indication of the type of web site that a domain name might be directed to, despite the fact that many registrants ignore the guidelines, or is there really no need for that additional direction any more?


(from iPhone)

Personally, I think the 2nd level serves purpose very well, you know what you are aiming at when you go there, I'd add further 2nd levels rather than reduce it down to a single pot, however, the general public just doesn't seem to get how domains were intended to work, just look at the number of UK only companies with a .com and the US seem to think .com is for them rather than using their country domains.

There is no benefit other than brand confusion if you don't own both .co.uk and .uk and shed loads of cash in the bank of a not for profit registry that is already cash rich if you do register the .co.uk and .uk

Perhaps Nominet ought to become for profit and convert us members into shareholders so we can all benefit from this cash windfall