4 ms·

There are many stakeholders from various backgrounds that all need to be considered before trying to push through one specific and narrow interest group. Yes,

by rooshdi 15y ago

There are many stakeholders from various backgrounds that all need to be considered before trying to push through one specific and narrow interest group. Yes, each type of "stakeholder" could be reserved a certain type of domain suffix based on their intended purpose of use. These guidelines should of actually been set in place at the onset so we wouldn't have all of the domain squatters we have today. Also, I'd much prefer to discuss potential solutions with you, but I see you've disregarded the notion completely.

ohashi 15y ago
Too late. Trillions of dollars have been spent by the various stakeholders branding .com into the minds of the global audience. You cannot simply undo that. As per my other comment, you're not interested in finding a potential solution. You've got one specific interest and aren't interested in hearing why your solution isn't viable. You simply are waiting for agreement, not a discussion. Here's a solution for startups, use a less than perfect domain until they've proven their worth, got more money and buy a better name. Or, use a lesser extension/subdomain. New gTLDs are around the corner, go pay the 185k fee and get .startup or .beta and create an official startup tld and regulate how you see fit. Let it compete, like a startup should.
- rooshdi 15y ago
  Go pay the 185k fee and get .startup or .beta and create an official startup tld and regulate how you see fit. Let it compete, like a startup should. I'm sorry but most start-ups can't afford 185k for a domain. Plus, re-branding takes another major investment a start-up may not be able to afford. You say "let it compete", but you're defending domain squatters who are making it more difficult to find a good name and market new services to consumers. Hell, there are even some domainers that can't even find a single name for their customer reviews startup. ;)
  - ohashi 15y ago
    185k isnt a domain, it's a registry. Buy the rights to the TLD .startup or .beta and compete with .com for startups business. I don't know any domainer in that position. You've really run out of arguments.
    - rooshdi 15y ago
      I don't know any domainer in that position. You don't? By the look of your website's About Page you do: My Current Job(s): Working on my own startup - Still looking for a name, but I am working on a customer reviews startup. Writer at MO.com - I interview entrepreneurs. I've done ~80 interviews as of February 2011 including some big names like Alexis Ohanian (Reddit), Aaron Wall (SEOBook) and David Hauser (Grasshopper.com). Domain Investor (or Domainer) - I buy, sell, and develop domain names. I now see why you are so adamant in your defense of domain squatters.
      - ohashi 15y ago
        I know exactly what you were hinting at, it wasn't subtle. It was pure ad hominem. However, it's outdated, sorry, you're still wrong :( My defense isn't of domain squatters, it's of a free market system that trillions of dollars have been invested in by many stakeholders around the globe. Trying to shift them in favor of one specific group (startups) is a joke. I am fairly certain you just want easier access to a better name without understanding the real impact of any proposed solution you have. I am done arguing with you, you are clearly unable to keep on topic.
        rooshdi 15y ago
        It was a pure Ad hominem. The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem We obviously have opposing views on the matter. We've made our arguments, let's just agree to disagree.
        15y ago

by rooshdi 15y ago

ohashi 15y ago

Too late. Trillions of dollars have been spent by the various stakeholders branding .com into the minds of the global audience. You cannot simply undo that. As per my other comment, you're not interested in finding a potential solution. You've got one specific interest and aren't interested in hearing why your solution isn't viable. You simply are waiting for agreement, not a discussion. Here's a solution for startups, use a less than perfect domain until they've proven their worth, got more money and buy a better name. Or, use a lesser extension/subdomain. New gTLDs are around the corner, go pay the 185k fee and get .startup or .beta and create an official startup tld and regulate how you see fit. Let it compete, like a startup should.

rooshdi 15y ago
Go pay the 185k fee and get .startup or .beta and create an official startup tld and regulate how you see fit. Let it compete, like a startup should. I'm sorry but most start-ups can't afford 185k for a domain. Plus, re-branding takes another major investment a start-up may not be able to afford. You say "let it compete", but you're defending domain squatters who are making it more difficult to find a good name and market new services to consumers. Hell, there are even some domainers that can't even find a single name for their customer reviews startup. ;)
- ohashi 15y ago
  185k isnt a domain, it's a registry. Buy the rights to the TLD .startup or .beta and compete with .com for startups business. I don't know any domainer in that position. You've really run out of arguments.
  - rooshdi 15y ago
    I don't know any domainer in that position. You don't? By the look of your website's About Page you do: My Current Job(s): Working on my own startup - Still looking for a name, but I am working on a customer reviews startup. Writer at MO.com - I interview entrepreneurs. I've done ~80 interviews as of February 2011 including some big names like Alexis Ohanian (Reddit), Aaron Wall (SEOBook) and David Hauser (Grasshopper.com). Domain Investor (or Domainer) - I buy, sell, and develop domain names. I now see why you are so adamant in your defense of domain squatters.
    - ohashi 15y ago
      I know exactly what you were hinting at, it wasn't subtle. It was pure ad hominem. However, it's outdated, sorry, you're still wrong :( My defense isn't of domain squatters, it's of a free market system that trillions of dollars have been invested in by many stakeholders around the globe. Trying to shift them in favor of one specific group (startups) is a joke. I am fairly certain you just want easier access to a better name without understanding the real impact of any proposed solution you have. I am done arguing with you, you are clearly unable to keep on topic.
      - rooshdi 15y ago
        It was a pure Ad hominem. The ad hominem is normally described as a logical fallacy, but it is not always fallacious; in some instances, questions of personal conduct, character, motives, etc., are legitimate and relevant to the issue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem We obviously have opposing views on the matter. We've made our arguments, let's just agree to disagree.
        15y ago