.UK Announced

[foz]

New Zealand Population 4 million. A lot less than the west midlands.

What has population got to do with it? The idea of opening up the second level still disrupts the third level holders.

 

[markb]

My guess is that they're going ahead with direct.uk and will release the statement after close of business to give people time to calm down and save staff from the shit storm that will blow up.

People wouldnt calm down overight. Going ahead would be a massive undertaking and lots of people will not be happy.

 

[Systreg]

My guess is that they're going ahead with direct.uk and will release the statement after close of business to give people time to calm down and save staff from the shit storm that will blow up.

I also think it'll be after 5:00pm when they announce it, then they'll all be down the pub or off home, I'm surprised they didn't work it so that the announcement was on a Friday, then they could have the whole weekend for people to calm down, not that anyone will be calming down if they go ahead with it.

 

[websaway]

What has population got to do with it? The idea of opening up the second level still disrupts the third level holders.

Well on the assumption that registrations are proportionate it involves changes to a lot less registrants and in this case less is easier.
Basically no comparison ( to New Zealand ) in actually making it happen.

 

[StoneRoses]

Does anyone here think them going ahead and ensuring .co.uk holders get the .uk of their name is a realistic option? Or are the only options that

A-Yes,it will go ahead as planned with tm holders getting first dibs

B-No the idea has been scrapped

 

[websaway]

Does anyone here think them going ahead and ensuring .co.uk holders get the .uk of their name is a realistic option? Or are the only options that

A-Yes,it will go ahead as planned with tm holders getting first dibs

B-No the idea has been scrapped

I go back to my old argument. They have already sold the uk business namespace in the form of co.uk and they have to get over that.

 

[AssetDomains]

No in its current form so does this mean the markets going to remain in limbo for longer

http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/update-directuk

 

[GreyWing]

Stability, awesome..... I like to invest on fault line, it's so much fun.

 

[cm1975]

No in its current form so does this mean the markets going to remain in limbo for longer

It would seem so, as long as the spectre of the .uk domain hanging over it.

Seems like they have met resistance, but don't want to lose face and will push forward with as much of it as possible. More consultation???

 

[websaway]

I would like to personally thank the people on here who have tirelessly championed this cause over the last few months.
Good luck to you in the future.

 

[boxfish]

Does this not make it sound like "Yes, but not yet", rather than "No"

Over the coming months, this work will explore:

A revised phased release mechanism based largely on the prior registrations of domains in existing third levels within .uk and in which contention between different applicants for the same domain name should be reduced or eliminated.

 

[Edwin]

Does this not make it sound like "Yes, but not yet", rather than "No"

Only if you ignore the immediately preceding paragraph, which states: "As a result, we are going to explore whether it is possible to present a revised proposal that meets the principles of increasing trust and security and maintaining the relevance of the .uk proposition in a changing landscape."

It looks more like they don't want to be left with egg on their faces with a flat rejection of the whole idea, so they will tinker and fiddle and finally conclude that either A) it's unworkable or B) the .uk should be handed wholesale to the .co.uk owner (since they're marketing .uk and .co.uk as being "for business") or C) they go for my "oldest registrant wins" approach.

No matter what, it looks like the land grab by TM holders at the detriment of anyone else is consigned, rightly, to the dustbin of history.

 

[websaway]

Does this not make it sound like "Yes, but not yet", rather than "No"

Under the circumstances they could not have just thrown it out without some resignations. This way it can die a slow death and they hope they will not be taken to task over the damage it has caused to the uk name space, they were somehow not connected to reality.

 

[Stephen]

Summary of .uk Consultation

No in its current form so does this mean the markets going to remain in limbo for longer

http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/update-directuk

Thanks.

There is also the 80 page Summary of the .uk Consoltation feedback to digest.

http://www.nominet.org.uk/how-participate/policy-development/current-policy-discussions-and-consultations

and the link to the 77 page detail analysis by Nomensa to read!

 

[Edwin]

I would like to personally thank the people on here who have tirelessly championed this cause over the last few months.

Can I second that? There are a number of people who have poured significant energy and resources into the fight (some of whom never participate on Acorn, but that does not take away one iota from their contributions). And an extra tip-of-the-hat to my fellow face-to-face battlers... doesn't November feel like a very long time ago?

 

[Systreg]

No in its current form so does this mean the markets going to remain in limbo for longer

http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/latest/update-directuk

Thanks for the update link, made a screen shot of it for posterity in case of changes to it:

 

[foz]

Can we please have EGM now?

 

[Edwin]

Wow, from the Nomensa report (pages 5-6)

Important caveat #1: Question 11a was confusing and
potentially misinterpreted by respondents

11a. Do you agree that Nominet should consider the provision of
a more secure .uk domain name service with registrations directly
at the second level?

This question was potentially confusing to respondents. Due to
the complex nature of the direct.uk proposal, this question was
asked after all the specific features had been explained.
However, the answer “Yes, as we have outlined above” could
have been misinterpreted by many as “Yes, but with the
changes that I have outlined above in response to the other
questions”. Exemplifying this, in the comments for 11a and
11b, 41 respondents expressed concern or disagreement with
the direct.uk proposal, even though they answered “Yes, as we
have outlined above” to 11a.

The question also contains two aspects: (a) a more secure .uk
domain name service, and (b) registrations directly at the
second level. For example, respondents who, agreed with the
principles of (a), but under no circumstances (b), the multiple
choice answers available may not have fulfilled their needs.

Given these potentially confusing factors, it is recommended
that Nominet do not place too much weight on the data
produced by this question, and instead look at the overall
positive vs. negative responses to each individual
feature/question.

In other words, they've pulled the fangs of the single most important question in the whole consultation, the one place that people had the opportunity to say "NO" to the whole sorry mess.

There will be a lot of reading ahead, and a huge number of "findings" to come out of this, I'm sure, but it's important not to lose sight of the above...

 

[GreyWing]

Can we please have EGM now?

Yep I think we are at that point mate, a year of this uncertainty is not doing anyone any favours. We'll start to look into putting this together now on this and other issues.

 

[foz]

Wow, from the Nomensa report (pages 5-6)



In other words, they've pulled the fangs of the single most important question in the whole consultation, the one place that people had the opportunity to say "NO" to the whole sorry mess.

There will be a lot of reading ahead, and a huge number of "findings" to come out of this, I'm sure, but it's important not to lose sight of the above...

Yes, bloody ridiculous. The board has to go!