Don't fall for Nominet's trick question 1a!

[Edwin]

(A quick word of warning, if you've not filled out the consultation document yet)

Question 1a in the consultation reads as follows:

1.a Do you agree with the proposal to enable second level domain registration in the way we have outlined?

Don't be tricked by the wording.

If you don't want .uk at all, say so clearly here. Of course tick the "no" box but don't repeat Nominet's wording in your answer. It's nothing to do with "the way they have outlined" it, it's about the concept itself.

So you could say something like:

- No. I am against the whole idea of .uk, regardless of implementation
- No. I am against .uk, period.
- No. I don't believe we need a .uk domain at all.
- No. The interests of UK internet users would be better served with no .uk at all.
- No. .uk should not happen at all.
- No. I am against the proposal. I am also against the idea of .uk.
(etc.)

Hopefully that gives you a few ideas, and helps you avoid the "trap" Nominet has tried to lay by getting you to accidentally agree with the concept even while disagreeing with the specifics.

 

[RobM]

Thanks for that Edwin. I have submitted my response. Just filling the first box saying I don't want the .uk means I don't have to fill out the rest of the consultation. Took me 2 mins.

 

[Edwin]

Thanks for that Edwin. I have submitted my response. Just filling the first box saying I don't want the .uk means I don't have to fill out the rest of the consultation. Took me 2 mins.

It may still be worth filling out the rest if you have specific concerns, but preface every single answer with something like:

"The fact that I am answering this question does not change my opposition to the whole concept of .uk, and should not be interpreted as such"

".uk should not happen, period. My answer to this question should not be interpreted as evidence to the contrary, nor should it be presented as such in the summary document."

That way, you get to try and "tweak" V2 to make it "less worse" in the event that Nominet press ahead regardless.

 

[Edwin]

BTW, if you just want to go with a "no" to 1a, it's still good if you can rattle off a list of reasons, for example:

- costly
- more confusing
- greater chance of phishing attacks
- misdirected emails
- unnecessary
- existing registrants already happy with their domain names
- won't increase supply of domains
- create a 2-tier system, with .co.uk seen as less desirable
etc.
etc.

 

[Lucien Taylor]

Very helpful Edwin. I am going to find half a day to read your report in detail and complete my feedback.

 

[Systreg]

(A quick word of warning, if you've not filled out the consultation document yet)

Question 1a in the consultation reads as follows:

1.a Do you agree with the proposal to enable second level domain registration in the way we have outlined?

I've missed it somewhere in all the .UK topics, can someone post a link to where we fill out the consultation form, please?

[edit]

Just seen a link to the form on this topic: http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/uk-do...e-you-replied-uk-consultation-yet-yes-no.html

Consultation for completed, I entered I am completely against the whole idea of second level domain registration of .uk, regardless of the way it could be implemented. in every box

 

[Paullas]

I've missed it somewhere in all the .UK topics, can someone post a link to where we fill out the consultation form, please?

[edit]

Just seen a link to the form on this topic: http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/uk-do...e-you-replied-uk-consultation-yet-yes-no.html

Consultation for completed, I entered I am completely against the whole idea of second level domain registration of .uk, regardless of the way it could be implemented. in every box

Same as you i have put nearly the same in every box.

 

[Edwin]

Brilliant, that's great stuff. The more the merrier. Please try and vary the words very, very slightly even if you find inspiration in what others have posted, so that it doesn't just look like a "form response"