.uk V2.0 Questions to Nominet & their Answers

[Stephen]

grandfathering .co.uk to .uk

Another Nominet blog comment post

"However, we are not starting with a blank sheet of paper. We are focussed on how to recognise the loyalty of existing registrants, many of whom feel entitled to the equivalent second-level domain."

In the feedback summary there was plenty of support for grandfathering rights for .co.uk to be given in all cases the .uk equivalent, as a 100% pairing solution.

In the V1 .uk feedback, there were 121 separate calls for .co.uk to have first rights over the equivalent .uk.
No calls for earliest registration or .org.uk to get the equivalent .uk.

If you check the feedback reports for V1 .uk you will find 8 separate quotes about grandfathering rights as an alternative option,
you will not find any quotes or reference about "the oldest registrant gets a chance at the .uk, if they ever find out about it".

Also in the V1 .uk feedback you will not find out any comments about why you should not introduce .uk via the "oldest uk domain gets the .uk",
although I know Nominet were provided with that information but due to it being outside the scope of your feedback
it was not included in the feedback reports or considered when making up your current plan for .uk.

So what part of the V1 .uk feedback in the summary supports "first registration" rather than grandfathering .co.uk rights as a fairer method?

 

[Stephen]

change nominet website?

Next posting for Nominet blog (not yet posted)

"We remain committed advocates of a multi-stakeholder approach to informing our policy development rather than a more top-down method of running the Internet."

Why then is Nominet not using its home page to show that Nominet is considering launching .uk?
and why is to so hard to find the .uk proposal on the Nominet website? (2 or 3 clicks and no easy navigation to it)

Why not have an easy to understand graphic and text with a link from Nominet's home webpage directly to the new .uk proposal.
Suggest you say something like "intend to introduce NEW .uk extension which would be the largest change to the UK internet, please read it and get involved and provide us with your views".

Currently to find the .uk proposal on the Nominet website you have to understand what
"Registration of second level domain names" means which is listed on the 2nd page
after clicking "Direct .uk consultation" (home page with no explanation as what that means)
which is under .wales consultation,
which means the .uk proposal is not even top billing on the second page,
which is visited en route to the .uk proposal. (sorry its a bit confusing!)

Web navigation should ensure home page content tells you what and why something is important and get you directly to the page in one click (not 2 or 3 clicks as currently).

In my experience with registrants of .co.uk they often are not familiar with the terms "tld, gld's, second level domains",
so need to phrase .uk proposal in words the mainstream reader would understand.

Also something about the .uk proposal on agreatplacetobe.co.uk may be helpful to spread the news.

Please review Nominet website so the .uk proposal is publicized in plain English and easier to find for those trying to locate it.

 

[TinkyWinky]

Latest addition :

" A time for change "

What a very interesting choice of title Miss Cowley - for it seems you wish to change everything - except Nominet's transparency.

 

[Nigel]

Nominet won't answer my emails as to why my comment on Lesley Cowley's blog has not been published. So I've sent a support request to Mollom.com and received an automated response confirming that it is being looked into. Here's the Mollom support page:

http://mollom.com/contact

 

[Marcoose]

Next posting for Nominet blog (not yet posted)

"We remain committed advocates of a multi-stakeholder approach to informing our policy development rather than a more top-down method of running the Internet."

Why is to so hard to find the proposal on your website then?

Why do you not have an easy to understand graphic and link directly from Nominet's home webpage directly to the new .uk proposal with something saying your "introducing .uk and this is would be the largest change in the UK internet, please read it and get involved and provide us with your views".

Currently to find the .uk proposal you have to understand what
"- Registration of second level domain names" means which is listed on the 2nd page after clicking "Direct .uk consultation" (home page) which is under .wales consultation, which means .uk proposal is not even top billing on the second page visited on route to the .uk proposal.

Web navigation should ensure home page tells you what and why something is important and get you directly to the page in one click (not 2 or 3 clicks as currently)

Please review Nominet website so the .uk proposal is publicized in plain English and easier to find.

Might want to check that one for grammar, Stephen

 

[Stephen]

Tidied?

Might want to check that one for grammar, Stephen

Thanks (I wish I had paid more attention in English), I have moved a few bits around and hope it make more sense now.

Paragraph in the middle about navigation is supposed to be mixed up,
as that is how I feel Nominet are making the .uk not easy to find for those looking.

 

[Nigel]

got hold of Phil Kingsland's email address. After all he's the head of marketing and communications - sent him this:

"I understand that you are Director of Marketing and Communications at Nominet. I made a comment on one of your blogs on Friday 26 July 2013 at approx. 1.20pm. The comment was never added. I also made a comment some months ago which was also not added. This time however I kept a copy and phoned your Customer Services Department. Adam told me that the moderator of the blog comments was a member of your marketing department and he told me to email on the email address [email protected]. I did that sending an email on Friday and a chaser on Monday and have yet to receive the courtesy of a response. I have copied my emails below so that you can look into the matter. I also contacted Mollom.com as they are mentioned on the foot of your blog page. It appears that they filter comments to remove spam. They have referred me to the website owners i.e. yourselves.

What is the point of a comments section on your blogs page if comments aren't added on the day that they are made? Why have I not had the courtesy of a response from your marketing department? I would be grateful if you could look into this and let me know why my comment has not been added. Thank you."

 

[Stephen]

Summer holidays?

got hold of Phil Kingsland's email address. After all he's the head of marketing and communications - sent him this:.....[/I]

Well done, I have contacted http://mollom.com/contact as you suggested earlier and have sent another email to [email protected].

Plus I have phoned Nominet twice today but nobody was available to take my call and they asked me to leave my number both times but no call back yet.

It must be the Summer holidays!

UPDATE: 30th July 2013 16.00
Phoned Nominet for a 3rd time today -waited for 8 minutes whilst they tried to put me through - nobody will take the call on the .uk team or at Manager or Director level.
Quote "they have the correspondence and are dealing with it" but the Nominet member of staff could not clarify what correspondence exactly that was.
Very disappointing with Nominet.

 

[Stephen]

comments have now been disabled

Somebody at Nominet must be paying attention.

On the Nominet blog page "A Time for Change"
Posted by Lesley Cowley, 15 July 2013

http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/blog/time-change

the comments have now been disabled so nobody can add any more comments.

There are still only 2 comments showing.

I had tried to phone them before I knew about this development,
see UPDATE to post above. (#239)

I can see that I'm going to have to spend some money with external marketing to get the word that Nominet are not being transparent about the .uk proposal.

 

[foz]

The New Zealand Law Society feedback on .nz is a good read.

http://dnc.org.nz/content/registrations_second_level_2_nzls.pdf

 

[Nigel]

Somebody at Nominet must be paying attention.

On the Nominet blog page "A Time for Change"
Posted by Lesley Cowley, 15 July 2013

http://www.nominet.org.uk/news/blog/time-change

the comments have now been disabled so nobody can add any more comments.

There are still only 2 comments showing.

I had tried to phone them before I knew about this development,
see UPDATE to post above.

I can see that I'm going to have to spend some money with external marketing to get the word that Nominet are not being transparent about the .uk proposal.

Well that's one way to cut out the negative comments!

 

[Stephen]

.nz thanks

The New Zealand Law Society feedback on .nz is a good read.

http://dnc.org.nz/content/registrations_second_level_2_nzls.pdf

Foz, very interesting and thanks for posting that and thanks to .nz for allowing the posting of comments on their .nz consultation
as they proceed rather than hide it until the end or not publish as happened in .uk V1.

It does make interesting reading and there are a lot of parallels in lack of transparency at the registry level.

I wonder from this quote if the New Zealand registry has a Directors / Staff bonus pool?

The DNCL stands to increase its revenue significantly from extra registrations under the proposed scheme.
The Law Society is therefore concerned that the DNCL has a conflict of interest in undertaking this consultation and implementing the proposed registration scheme.

 

[Stephen]

pure irony

Well that's one way to cut out the negative comments!

I think it is pure irony that the last comment displayed on the blog was:

I feel that Nominet are not being transparent in this process.

I'm sure Nominet will make up a rational explanation,
if anybody who can get an answer bothers to ask them why?

If anybody can get me discounted rates at a National newspaper for a large advert, I would be very grateful.

I'm off to write my single document about V2 .uk, which I hope to have ready before end of August and would like to publicise to the media and to a larger audience than Nominet are informing.
So please pm or post on this thread any more questions or points of view that would be helpful to the .uk debate 'for or against'.

 

[Nigel]

nominet survey

I agree and I bet they're seething that the last comment on their blog site are your words. 'I feel Nominet are not being transparent in this process' . I'm surprised that your comment wasn't deleted:

Anyway they haven't yet disabled the nominet website survey link which is on the same page as Lesley Cowley's blog page. So I took the opportunity to let them know that their website serves my needs 'very poorly' and explained about their disabling the comments section and about the lack of any customer care or answering of emails. Here's the link. Quick and easy to complete. Don't know whether anyone at nominet will actually read the responses but made me feel better:

http://www.surveygizmo.com/s3/1260864/Nominet-Website-Survey

 

[Stephen]

Draft 1.10?

After lack of answers from Nominet, I feel I have to write a single document on V2 .uk proposal without their answers.

Anyway below is my 10th draft, and I feel with some work and tidying,
this may get the attention of non-domainers that should be made aware of the Nominet .uk proposal.
If it gets some publicity.

Any thoughts?

DRAFT

.uk what you should know before you complete the consultation

Nominet the UK domain registrar authority are trying to introduce a new domain name extension: .uk (example ibm.uk) in 2014, although the details of the proposal have not been widely publicised.

Currently there is a consultation which is being held, which Nominet hope will give them the mandate to launch .uk in its preferred way.

I would urge you to read this document and then complete the consultation feedback now.

The closing deadline of .uk consultation is the 23rd September 2013.

If .uk is introduced in the way Nominet propose, there are unforeseen and damaging consequences that are likely to happen:

1. Millions of .co.uk owners with built up business will find that as they did not know or understand .uk, their domain name with a .uk extension will be owned by somebody else. Which may set up in competition with them or be used to sell them the .uk name at some exorbitant amount or be used by cyber criminals. Even if the new .uk domain is not used it by the new owners it could cause problems over time for the .co.uk business as those thinking they have moved to .uk and not finding it assume they have gone out of business. Based on current number of 9,500,000 .co.uk domains registered and Nominet have so far contacted directly an estimated number of less than 10,000 UK registrants.
2. Up to 250,000 businesses may find they don’t have the right to their equivalent .uk domain, due to the way Nominet intend to allocate rights to the domain, namely .org.uk, .net.uk and .me.uk owners. Based on Nominet figure in the .uk proposal notes justifying their action with 500,000 identical third level strings.
3. 10,000’s of businesses per year, after .uk is introduced, who obtained the .uk for protection, will forget to renew the .co.uk or .uk domain as it is not used and it will then fall into the hands of somebody else, with the same consequences as outlined in point number 1.
4. Organizations that move over to .uk will incur huge rebranding costs which will cost the economy billions of £’s for little or no benefit.
5. Confusion will reign over what the different UK domain extensions mean compared to the order we have at present with .co.uk (commercial), .org.uk (not for profit), .me.uk (personal), .gov.uk (UK government), .ac.uk (education), .sch.uk (schools), .ltd.uk (limited companies), .plc.uk (plc company), .police.uk (police), .nhs.uk (NHS) what will .uk actually mean?
6. Moving domain names even from .co.uk to .uk can be very disruptive to search engine rankings, which many businesses will not understand and find out to their cost, the damage that can be done to traffic, search engine rankings and lost links.
7. Confidence in UK domains may be lost by the consumer in the way Nominet has handled the introduction, which may affect existing registrants in all sorts of ways. With the introduction of several hundred new domain extensions such as .london, .shop etc. any loss of confidence could not happen at a worse time.
8. Confidence over time may be lost in businesses that maintain .co.uk and don’t move over to .uk and so suffer commercially in the long term if they did not obtain the equivalent .uk.
9. It is harder to find a new domain .uk if everybody wants the .uk whereas before certain organizations used different extensions such as .org.uk.
10. There will also be a wave of cyber crime based on the domain name, which has already started to happen in registrations have been made for capturing type in and email mistakes e.g. argosco.uk would capture traffic incorrectly for argos.co.uk, such mistakes would happen. Certain people have started to register <yourbusiness>co.co.uk to be entitled to the equivalent <yourbusiness>co.uk when they launched in 2014.

There are also the special cases of a few hundred .co.uk registrants that are also not going to get the equivalent .uk domain because of Nominet's decisions.

These include, the unilaterally reservation of .uk domain names for government quango's (without even checking with them they want the reserved .uk domain names ) and registrants who spent over £3,000,000 with Nominet at a recent auction for premium .co.uk domains, where the equivalent .uk will be given to .me.uk owners under the current proposal.

Not to mention the people who recently took up the chance to extend and pay for renewals on .co.uk for 10 years as .co.uk was the place to be in the UK namespace only to be told the place to be will be replaced by .uk.

If any of the above alarms you, please get involved and complete the Nominet consultation.

The details of the current .uk proposal can be found here, but be careful you have to read all the documents to get all the details including the questions and answers page.

If you have any specific questions or comments then I can be contacted on [email protected].

The rest of the document will provide you with background into .uk, some more insight into the current .uk proposal and an alternative proposal to introduce .uk in a different way that you may consider is worth suggesting to Nominet (100% .co.uk and .uk pairing).

 

[max_rk]

As for No.10 - cut off point could be set backwards.

 

[Retired_Member38]

"Up to 250,000 businesses may find they don’t have the right to their equivalent .uk domain, due to the way Nominet intend to allocate rights to the domain, namely .org.uk, .net.uk and .me.uk owners."

It would probably be worth explaining how you came about the 250k number - without any sort of details, it just kinda looks like a number pulled from thin air.

 

[Stephen]

Nominets - numbers

"Up to 250,000 businesses may find they don’t have the right to their equivalent .uk domain, due to the way Nominet intend to allocate rights to the domain, namely .org.uk, .net.uk and .me.uk owners."

It would probably be worth explaining how you came about the 250k number - without any sort of details, it just kinda looks like a number pulled from thin air.

Thanks, I intend to expand on detail in another section, as if the first list too long with explanations the messages would get diluted.

Nominet are quoting in excess of 500,000 duplicate strings in UK namespace that are a problem in their proposal.

Have requested several times in emails, postings and meetings for them to breakdown figure.

Without more information, I can only state that is potentially a maximum of 250,000 problems plus any extra they create with non government departments etc.

 

[Stephen]

no protection

As for No.10 - cut off point could be set backwards.

Agree but then anybody could just register the <yourbrand>co.uk directly when .uk launched, as there is nothing in place to stop anybody registering that name.

 

[Retired_Member38]

Without more information, I can only state that is potentially a maximum of 250,000 problems plus any extra they create with non government departments etc.

Ah, so it really is a number pulled out of thin air then

imo I would remove that.... if you're going to just make shit up it completely ruins any credibility your document is going to have.