4 ms·

They saw the applications coming in, therefore had information the rest of us didn't have. I didn't write an objection, I wrote a blog post.

cbsmith 14y ago
You have to admit though, a LOT of people who were critical of the new policy have been saying this is how it will play out.
- davewiner 14y ago
  I guess I didn't notice until the applications were there in black and white. :-)
icarus_drowning 14y ago
Your assertion is that the press is missing the story. Which seems accurate. But wouldn't it be better to file an objection rather than just writing a blog post about it? Isn't that more useful and practical?
- JohannL 14y ago
  But then the press still woul have missed it. And I for example might never have heard of it. Also, what makes you think one excludes the other? Why berate the one guy who at least a.) paid attention and b.) wrote about it, for not also doing c.) and d.)? Everybody is still free to file an objection, including the author, and now actually MORE people who would be inclined to do so, are in a position to do it (i.e. they heard of it, instead of this going down in silence).
- spinebless 14y ago
  But then the press still would have missed it. And I for example might never have heard of it. Also, what makes you think one excludes the other? Why berate the one guy who at least a.) paid attention and b.) wrote about it, for not also doing c.) and d.)? Everybody is still free to file an objection, including the author, and now actually MORE people who would be inclined to do so, are in a position to do it (i.e. they heard of it, instead of this going down in silence).
  - icarus_drowning 14y ago
    Well, first of all, I'm not berating him, which is why I made an effort to note that I largely agree with his point here-- in fact, it is because I agree with him that I thought it was worth pointing out that "raising awareness" through a blog post is only half the battle-- people are far more inclined to respond to it if the author is willing to take the effort and do something about the problem. Maybe Dave's planning on filing an objection, I don't know. If he is, great. But it is easy to come off as someone whining on the internet even if you have a respectable position if the only thing you're doing is complaining.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
jleader 14y ago
But the rules about the application process have been public (and changing, and generating controversy) for years. Did you really think companies were going to pony up almost $200,000 for a TLD application, and then "share" it with the world? When Nike gets .nike, or Pepsi gets .pepsi, do you expect them to "share"? (Actually, Pepsi has said they're not going to apply for .pepsi)
- wmf 14y ago
  There's a big difference between a brand name and a generic word. Also, nobody's asking for free domains.
larrys 14y ago
"They saw the applications coming in, therefore had information the rest of us didn't have." But if you read and go through the application process (as well as the process leading up to this where everything was discussed and layed out) what those companies are doing is allowed. So the fact that they saw that companies did this has no effect.

cbsmith 14y ago

You have to admit though, a LOT of people who were critical of the new policy have been saying this is how it will play out.

davewiner 14y ago
I guess I didn't notice until the applications were there in black and white. :-)

icarus_drowning 14y ago

Your assertion is that the press is missing the story. Which seems accurate. But wouldn't it be better to file an objection rather than just writing a blog post about it? Isn't that more useful and practical?

JohannL 14y ago
But then the press still woul have missed it. And I for example might never have heard of it. Also, what makes you think one excludes the other? Why berate the one guy who at least a.) paid attention and b.) wrote about it, for not also doing c.) and d.)? Everybody is still free to file an objection, including the author, and now actually MORE people who would be inclined to do so, are in a position to do it (i.e. they heard of it, instead of this going down in silence).
spinebless 14y ago
But then the press still would have missed it. And I for example might never have heard of it. Also, what makes you think one excludes the other? Why berate the one guy who at least a.) paid attention and b.) wrote about it, for not also doing c.) and d.)? Everybody is still free to file an objection, including the author, and now actually MORE people who would be inclined to do so, are in a position to do it (i.e. they heard of it, instead of this going down in silence).
- icarus_drowning 14y ago
  Well, first of all, I'm not berating him, which is why I made an effort to note that I largely agree with his point here-- in fact, it is because I agree with him that I thought it was worth pointing out that "raising awareness" through a blog post is only half the battle-- people are far more inclined to respond to it if the author is willing to take the effort and do something about the problem. Maybe Dave's planning on filing an objection, I don't know. If he is, great. But it is easy to come off as someone whining on the internet even if you have a respectable position if the only thing you're doing is complaining.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]

jleader 14y ago

But the rules about the application process have been public (and changing, and generating controversy) for years. Did you really think companies were going to pony up almost $200,000 for a TLD application, and then "share" it with the world? When Nike gets .nike, or Pepsi gets .pepsi, do you expect them to "share"? (Actually, Pepsi has said they're not going to apply for .pepsi)

wmf 14y ago
There's a big difference between a brand name and a generic word. Also, nobody's asking for free domains.

larrys 14y ago

"They saw the applications coming in, therefore had information the rest of us didn't have." But if you read and go through the application process (as well as the process leading up to this where everything was discussed and layed out) what those companies are doing is allowed. So the fact that they saw that companies did this has no effect.