.UK Announced

[Stephen]

Nominet plan "B"

Easily circumvented by Nom saying that it's for/about/aimed at businesses, not charities that should be on the .org.uk anyway.

That may well be the case but Nominet will be on to plan "B" as I doubt if they will be able to get their plan "A" .uk proposal as proposed due to the criticism and opposition it has attracted.

Nominet Plan "B" will be to change a few things and say they have listened.

I would guess they will want .org.uk to come into picture as they would still be able to have auctions and when Phil Kingsland of Nominet has talked about migration (see The Guardian article) he has stated about the .org.uk having rights in any migration to .uk so this would strengthen their case for plan B in their view?

 

[Nigel]

Easily circumvented by Nom saying that it's for/about/aimed at businesses, not charities that should be on the .org.uk anyway.

The charities quoted by the Telegraph article are complaining that the new shorter .uk domain is being promoted by Nominet as a 'more secure' domain name i.e. the existing extensions such as .org.uk and .co.uk will be seen as insecure. Now that obviously doesn't help when you are a charity looking for donations.

Nominet are obviously digging themselves in a hole and they're getting up to their necks now - we all know the security features are a smokescreen to help them launch the new direct.uk and gives them a reason for charging up to £20 per annum. So what do nominet do next - suggest to the charities that they register the new shorter .uk with the better security features? despite the fact that they said it was designed for businesses! Its obvious that major charities like nspcc and rnli would apply, at extra expense, for the .uk because they already own the .co.uk versions. But its worth noting that these major charities don't use the .co.uk versions - most just redirect to the .org.uk (i.e. look at nspcc.co.uk). For them the .org.uk gives them trust with the public. The .co.uk might give out the wrong signal and so might the .uk as it doesn't shout 'non profit' like the .org.uk domain currently does. So it's another reason why Nominet's greedy plan should be dead in the water. The public have come to trust the split between .co.uk and .org.uk and charities are happy to use the .org.uk.

 

[Stephen]

Longterm...

.... So what do nominet do next - suggest to the charities that they register the new shorter .uk with the better security features? despite the fact that they said it was designed for businesses! ......

I wish I had thought of that consequence (for the consultation) as when you take it to its logical conclusion in the long term both business and legitmate users of .org.uk would want .uk and so reduce the choice of new domains for business in .uk (not increase as Nominet had wished for) as now more organization types would want the prime UK domain and not seek to use .org.uk and only register .co.uk to protect their .uk domain.

 

[Blossom]

The charities quoted by the Telegraph article are complaining that the new shorter .uk domain is being promoted by Nominet as a 'more secure' domain name i.e. the existing extensions such as .org.uk and .co.uk will be seen as insecure. Now that obviously doesn't help when you are a charity looking for donations.

Nominet are obviously digging themselves in a hole and they're getting up to their necks now - we all know the security features are a smokescreen to help them launch the new direct.uk and gives them a reason for charging up to £20 per annum. So what do nominet do next - suggest to the charities that they register the new shorter .uk with the better security features? despite the fact that they said it was designed for businesses! Its obvious that major charities like nspcc and rnli would apply, at extra expense, for the .uk because they already own the .co.uk versions. But its worth noting that these major charities don't use the .co.uk versions - most just redirect to the .org.uk (i.e. look at nspcc.co.uk). For them the .org.uk gives them trust with the public. The .co.uk might give out the wrong signal and so might the .uk as it doesn't shout 'non profit' like the .org.uk domain currently does. So it's another reason why Nominet's greedy plan should be dead in the water. The public have come to trust the split between .co.uk and .org.uk and charities are happy to use the .org.uk.

Good point. Will the average visitor even know that .uk is more secure If it's communicated in the same way other things have been, then I guess the majority will still be in the dark Not even sure the average visitor understands the extensions system - they just seem to accept that there are different extensions and assume if they can't remember then Google will.

 

[Nigel]

Key Stakeholders were consulted in August 2012

I've been reading through some of the freedom of information act requests about direct.uk. I don't know if this has been discussed on here but I am perturbed to find out there was a preliminary consultation before the main consultation. Some 'key stakeholders' were consulted around two months before the main consultation was launched. Nominet had produced a draft consultation by 2nd August 2012 which was sent to Government in an email with the comment 'As a preliminary stage, I am reaching out to a small number of of our key stakeholders to seek initial thoughts and feedback with a view to further refining the draft'

So who are these key stakeholders who were privileged to take part in this preliminary stage and provide feedback which was then used to refine the draft? Any ideas? I think we have a right to know.

Here's the link to the website that provides this information:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/139377/response/344123/attach/4/FOI 121635 emails.pdf

 

[Systreg]

@ Nigel, that'll no doubt be the biggest registrars and/or others with a vested interest, who would all be very much in favour of direct.uk

It's a bit like a sweet manufacturer asking 5 year olds if they like the idea of bringing out a new type of sweet, all the 5 year olds say, yes.

 

[Nigel]

@ Nigel, that'll no doubt be the biggest registrars and/or others with a vested interest, who would all be very much in favour of direct.uk

It's a bit like a sweet manufacturer asking 5 year olds if they like the idea of bringing out a new type of sweet, all the 5 year olds say, yes.

That's what I first thought when I read that sentence. If some of the large registrars did help 'refine' the consultation document then I think it undermines the whole process. Don't suppose Nominet will want to divulge who the 'key stakeholders' were. Maybe there will be ways to find out.

 

[Stephen]

Computer Weekly story

Rehash of a story but in quality website

http://www.computerweekly.com/news/2240176103/Campaigners-oppose-Nominet-plans-for-secure-uk-domain

by Warwick Ashford

Also if go to google.co.uk news section this link is in a "top story" slot.

 

[TinkyWinky]

All good - it needs more pressure on Ed Vaisey to see what a c*ck he is being at sweeping this to one side... preferably from within his own party so he can make it look like he has decided to get tough and see why a not for profit organisation needs to make £100m a year for NO reason!

 

[Stephen]

bsc.org

Chartered Institute for IT which Nominet visited - now picking up story

http://www.bcs.org/content/conWebDoc/49444

 

[Nigel]

I think you can see from the link I posted earlier (i.e the one that shows some of the correspondence released under the freedom of information request) that the Government has given full support to the introduction of direct.uk from the very start of this process. It looks like they were even encouraging Nominet to move this forward. It is also clear that Nominet also got their 'key stakeholders' on board from the start. They even got them to help draft the consultation process - you couldn't make it up - could you?

Nominet's confidence in knowing that they have got such powerful allies, and no really powerful group who could realistically shoot down their plans, meant that they ploughed on with a process that totally disregarded the views or rights of existing registrants. They drew up the most biased process, and loaded consultation, with a feedback form that was not sent to existing registrants. If any did happen to find out about the consultation, then the form was loaded in such a way that most of the answers imply that you are in agreement with the introduction of direct.uk. Many people on this forum used the comment boxes to voice dissent but how many ordinary registrants (i.e. without all the advice and warnings on here) would have been wise to that.

I think the Stevenage MP has done a grand job in responding to his consituent's request to investigate direct.uk, and without him I think Nominet would be near the finishing line. Of course they'll have to consider the feedbacks but they'll always find another way to proceed (just like the EU) if they think there is no strong voice against them. That is why we really need the opposition to start asking questions in Parliament about the consultation process and the way this whole affair has been conducted. There is plenty of evidence to show how biased this process has been, with the Government not showing the slightest concern for existing registrants.

 

[TinkyWinky]

Chartered Institute for IT which Nominet visited - now picking up story

http://www.bcs.org/content/conWebDoc/49444

That's a shockingly brief overview... is it worth one of us going back to them to show all the floors in the argument like

i. There's still not one reason why the extension is NEEDED

ii. "leaving companies with the choice of paying over the odds or taking their chances with an insecure web address." is actually misleading (as is the whole proposal)

It doesn't mean a more or less secure online environment - as everything being proposed can actually happen on .co.uk. THis will however lead to the perception that the .co.uk is not secure!

iii. Why does a not for profit organisation want to raise £120m a year at the dircet expense of UK businesses and individuals?

iv. This will not mean any more domains for the average joe - in fact it is simply a money raising exercise - which for a not for profit organisation shoudl not be allowed.

etc etc etc

They have not even sought any comments... D minus grade from me....

 

[websaway]

I think you can see from the link I posted earlier (i.e the one that shows some of the correspondence released under the freedom of information request) that the Government has given full support to the introduction of direct.uk from the very start of this process. It looks like they were even encouraging Nominet to move this forward. It is also clear that Nominet also got their 'key stakeholders' on board from the start. They even got them to help draft the consultation process - you couldn't make it up - could you?

Nominet's confidence in knowing that they have got such powerful allies, and no really powerful group who could realistically shoot down their plans, meant that they ploughed on with a process that totally disregarded the views or rights of existing registrants. They drew up the most biased process, and loaded consultation, with a feedback form that was not sent to existing registrants. If any did happen to find out about the consultation, then the form was loaded in such a way that most of the answers imply that you are in agreement with the introduction of direct.uk. Many people on this forum used the comment boxes to voice dissent but how many ordinary registrants (i.e. without all the advice and warnings on here) would have been wise to that.

I think the Stevenage MP has done a grand job in responding to his consituent's request to investigate direct.uk, and without him I think Nominet would be near the finishing line. Of course they'll have to consider the feedbacks but they'll always find another way to proceed (just like the EU) if they think there is no strong voice against them. That is why we really need the opposition to start asking questions in Parliament about the consultation process and the way this whole affair has been conducted. There is plenty of evidence to show how biased this process has been, with the Government not showing the slightest concern for existing registrants.

Good accurate to the point post this one.

 

[bulkcorn]

Been feeling a bit oppressed lately? need something to lighten the moment?

Check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WSIUf2hD6Io&feature=youtube_gdata_player

:lol::lol::lol: Oh, you don't say! :lol::lol::lol:

 

[TinkyWinky]

Nominet Plan "B" will be to change a few things and say they have listened.

So this is where as stakeholders we need to be prepared - and prepared to ensure this time there is a level playing field with a proper survey - one that is not biased to the positive vote or phrased in such a way that when you don't agree with it - you can;t just submit to say that - f&&&&&&& outrageous that survey was.

I am sure they think they can probably use the "we've listened and have changed it" BS, but as stakeholders/shareholders there is a due diligience process they should be made to follow to ensure ALL their members and ALL domain owners get a fair AND SIMPLE vote.

I know it is probably a bit tenuous, but these are exactly the points that recent strikes by Unions have failed where they have been challendged

e.g. with BA etc.

The wrong question asked (i.e. not phrased correctly enough)
The wrong "%ge in favour" of the "%ge votes cast" being used to justify a strike

etc.

This could get mired in the sh&* for a long time if we need it to and we get some sound advice on how to ensure it does... this delay shoudl also then have a lot of excellent knock on effects!

 

[Stephen]

UK or not UK?

I think you can see from the link I posted earlier (i.e the one that shows some of the correspondence released under the freedom of information request) that the Government has given full support to the introduction of direct.uk from the very start of this process. It looks like they were even encouraging Nominet to move this forward. It is also clear that Nominet also got their 'key stakeholders' on board from the start. They even got them to help draft the consultation process - you couldn't make it up - could you? .......

In the email you posted one of the early cornerstones of the proposal was ".uk owners would have a valid UK presence" this had to be dropped very early as a domainer from this forum correctly told them that was illegal under EU law. So one of their main items to have trust in .uk was shot down straight away.

The reason I raise this again is something Bailey has posted on another Acorn thread which show in the internet age how difficult it is to verify anything

BBC report US employee outsourced his job to China

 

[Stephen]

finishing line?

I think you can see from the link I posted earlier (i.e the one that shows some of the correspondence released under the freedom of information request) that the Government has given full support to the introduction of direct.uk from the very start of this process. It looks like they were even encouraging Nominet to move this forward. It is also clear that Nominet also got their 'key stakeholders' on board from the start. They even got them to help draft the consultation process - you couldn't make it up - could you?

Nominet's confidence in knowing that they have got such powerful allies, and no really powerful group who could realistically shoot down their plans, meant that they ploughed on with a process that totally disregarded the views or rights of existing registrants. They drew up the most biased process, and loaded consultation, with a feedback form that was not sent to existing registrants. If any did happen to find out about the consultation, then the form was loaded in such a way that most of the answers imply that you are in agreement with the introduction of direct.uk. Many people on this forum used the comment boxes to voice dissent but how many ordinary registrants (i.e. without all the advice and warnings on here) would have been wise to that.

I think the Stevenage MP has done a grand job in responding to his consituent's request to investigate direct.uk, and without him I think Nominet would be near the finishing line. Of course they'll have to consider the feedbacks but they'll always find another way to proceed (just like the EU) if they think there is no strong voice against them. That is why we really need the opposition to start asking questions in Parliament about the consultation process and the way this whole affair has been conducted. There is plenty of evidence to show how biased this process has been, with the Government not showing the slightest concern for existing registrants.

Agree except for the finishing line comment.

I believe it is a lot of factors including the many that have contributed to this thread have paved the way to get Nominet to see that is no slam dunk.

I think that Edwin's contributions and many others at that.co.uk etc have brought the matter, arguments and potential consequences to many people's attention.

Plus many domainers attended the Nominet round table sessions have all done their bit to chip away at Nominet's proposal.

I applaud Stephen MacPartland the Stevenage MP (and Alex who brought the matter to his attention) and hope that he takes the matter further as he has stated he may do.

But continued effort needs to be made on several fronts to ensure that Nominet knows there is serious opposition to their .uk proposal and they simply cannot change a few things and force it through without a real debate and wider consultation.

 

[Nigel]

Agree except for the finishing line comment.

I believe it is a lot of factors including the many that have contributed to this thread have paved the way to get Nominet to see that is no slam dunk.

I think that Edwin's contributions and many others at that.co.uk etc have brought the matter, arguments and potential consequences to many people's attention.

Plus many domainers attended the Nominet round table sessions have all done their bit to chip away at Nominet's proposal.

I applaud Stephen MacPartland the Stevenage MP (and Alex who brought the matter to his attention) and hope that he takes the matter further as he has stated he may do.

But continued effort needs to be made on several fronts to ensure that Nominet knows there is serious opposition to their .uk proposal and they simply cannot change a few things and force it through without a real debate and wider consultation.

Hi Stephen - Sorry - could have worded that a bit better. I think the efforts of yourself, Edwin and quite a few others have been magnificent and will have influenced a lot of people, and prompted many to complete the feedback. I just thought it was very important when an MP got to ask a question in Parliament - that makes Nominet sit up and take notice. They know this consultation has really come under the spotlight when questions start getting asked in Parliament. Hopefully Labour will pick up on it too and start looking at the consultation process in detail.

 

[anthony]

...Hopefully Labour will pick up on it too and start looking at the consultation process in detail.

I wouldn't count on Labour where Nominet are concerned.

 

[GreyWing]

It isn't a Labour or Conservative issue mate, Nominet have a history of in my opinion an innapropirate relationship with the Civil Service. I believe one who was involved in the private email address scandal to avoid the Freedom of Information act, went on to work at Nominet when he left the Civil Service. He no longer works there now, spat out as of no further use maybe?

So it isn't a political issue as such, it's a Civil Servants problem. Imagine "Yes Prime Minister" in real life.