Is it just me or.....

[denchomsky]

Is it just me or are there others who think that using .org, .org.uk, mobi, info, names for sites that aren't organisations, mobile, information sites..e.t.c leaves a slightly bad taste?

Personally I would have no interest in developing a name such as for example, icecream.org.uk, as ice cream is not an organisation.

I don't own any names other than .co.uk's and a couple of .com's, I know that org's and org.uk's can achieve quite high sale prices but I feel that the extension should be used for what it was intended as I feel it is a bit cybersquattie (made up word) to do otherwise.????

 

[accelerator]

What kind of site would not qualify as an information site for .info??

Rgds

 

[denchomsky]

What kind of site would not qualify as an information site for .info??

Rgds

A music download site, a file sharing site.?

 

[Pred]

A music download site, a file sharing site.?

so what would you use musicdownloads.info for? ;-)

 

[killaclown]

not too sure but, would ice cream .co.uk / .com be ok, even though its not a company?

I think maybe its just the way they were intially set up and why more extensions are being introduced or considered

 

[denchomsky]

so what would you use musicdownloads.info for? ;-)

A site with info about music download sites, rather than an actual music download site, its not that difficult to work out

 

[denchomsky]

not too sure but, would ice cream .co.uk / .com be ok, even though its not a company?

I think a .co.uk or .com can be used for anything, but .org is specific in it's intended user group classification.

 

[accelerator]

Personally I would have no interest in developing a name such as for example, icecream.org.uk, as ice cream is not an organisation.

The same might apply to icecream.co.uk. However, I think "organisation" is a very broad term, so don't have a problem with .org.uk regged for generic terms, and I think that would be the majority on this forum.

Rgds

 

[doodlebug]

As long as there is no restrictions then it doesn't bother me.

I think .me.uk is an iffy one :|

Ps. What about an organisation of Parrots ?

 

[killaclown]

co.uk and com were set to mean, company United Kingdom and company respectively. .org was set up mean organisation, theres no difference they all can be

used for anything

the web as totally evolved from when domains were set up, people who use it and the ways its being used, its more social and more personal.

its not just companies or organsiation that reside on the web any more.

 

[wb]

.co.uk - general use (usually commercial)
.org.uk - general use (usually for non-profit organisations)

Personally I'm not a massive fan of .org.uk's, but surely using the logic in your post would mean that there should be no 'non-profit' websites being 'cybersquattie' on the .co.uk extension either?

 

[WealdDomains]

... Personally I'm not a massive fan of .org.uk's ...

I agree, and overall I'm somewhere between you and denchomsky along the spectrum, unlike most posters so far.

I have a fairly simplistic view of what I expect the various domain types to cover which historically has influenced (and been influenced by) my own browsing behaviour since the early days and which has also subsequently influenced my domain name purchases and my assessments of those offered for sale by others.

I think it's a very interesting question that denchomsky raised, even though (or perhaps because) we won't gain consensus on the right answer.

David

 

[Bailey]

Is it just me or are there others who think that using .org, .org.uk, mobi, info, names for sites that aren't organisations, mobile, information sites..e.t.c leaves a slightly bad taste?

Personally I would have no interest in developing a name such as for example, icecream.org.uk, as ice cream is not an organisation.

I don't own any names other than .co.uk's and a couple of .com's, I know that org's and org.uk's can achieve quite high sale prices but I feel that the extension should be used for what it was intended as I feel it is a bit cybersquattie (made up word) to do otherwise.????

I make you very wrong on this issue denchomsky.

If we go back to the true "allocation of extensions" for uses. You tend to find each individual is willing to give the interpretation that seems to fit their use at the time of their entry into domains - Not the one that was actually envisaged. (including me)

Lets take as an example .org /.org.uk

.org = originally intended as a domain for "Not-for-profit" organisations. True position = anything that purveys advice/ trusted/opinonated. High current value (above .net) for the right and most terms

.org.uk = the UK web developers friend. traffic proven. Has no real identity apart from those charitable organisations you would expect to find there.

There is a massive diference between the perception and therefore uses of extensions on the Global stage and those at our local UK market. (you can either blame or thank our almost unique domain sub-system for that) And this has clearly resulted in a completly differerent direction for the uk market.

I personally find it really difficult to understand individuals that talk about the internet in any sense of fixed criteria. And usually find that a trait of those under 25 years of age or so. This is very much an evolving Channel far beyond simple "functional improvements" that exist in other technical areas.

Move with it or lose touch with it

 

[chrisduggan]

I have never liked the org.uk extension, I have never seen any real value. Same said for alot of other random extensions. However when it comes to development it doesn't really matter, if there is a genuine use for it and optimised correctly.

My personal domain name portfolio is 98% .co.uk. Less than a handful of org.uk, a couple of .me.uk. I own one .com and one .co

I let most drop now as they have any real use or value in today's market.

 

[denchomsky]

Just me then

I wonder, if questioned what the average internet user would expect to find on websites using these extensions, or if they even give it a second thought.

I would confidently say that given a list of links that most would click on the .co.uk (in the uk), but would this just be habit or would the extension influence their choice because of their expectations about the type of content they expect to find?

I know that the extensions we are discussing can be successfully monetized, and optimised to do well in SERPS but this was never my question, it was a question about association with the extension, much like you would expect a limited company to have LTD after its name, this association does not really seem to be relevant or important to most on this forum but for some reason I still wouldn't develop an .org or .org.uk, I would rather hyphenate a .co.uk

 

[johnnyboy]

The strength that search engines give to keywords has meant that extensions have not been used for their intended purposes. Biggest culprits - affiliate marketers. I'm not having a go because I'm one of them. If affiliate marketing didn't exist then extensions would be used more appropriately.

 

[anthony]

The strength that search engines give to keywords has meant that extensions have not been used for their intended purposes. Biggest culprits - affiliate marketers. I'm not having a go because I'm one of them. If affiliate marketing didn't exist then extensions would be used more appropriately.

That about nails the point. When I search for anything, the 'above the fold/page 1' results are pretty much all that matters to me, as in most cases the resulting sites are what i'm looking for. So frankly, I don't even give the extension much attention as a searcher, you know almost straight away once you've clicked a link that the site has what you're looking for or not, although the name itself still has some 'value'. My main trading site (not domain related) has no reference in the domain name whatsoever to the industry it serves, yet it ranks top 1-5 in so many categories for the sector, it proves that relevant content will always rule over the name itself.

 

[foz]

Regarding .org.uk.

The AUDA had a crack down on invalid .org.au registrations a while back (those that did not comply with the policy).

http://www.auda.org.au/news-archive/orgau-audit/
http://www.ecommercereport.com.au/story105.php
http://blogs.mallesons.com/ipwhiteboard/auda-audits-orgau-domain-names
http://www.zdnet.com.au/government-eyes-auda-regulation-339301394.htm

Reading through Nominets registration policy:

8. Specific Rules for registration in the .org.uk SLD
8.1 Introduction

These are the specific rules for the .org.uk SLD, administered directly by us. They form part of and, in the case of conflict, take precedence over the Rules.

8.2. SLD Charter

Registrants in .org.uk are intended to be not-for-profit or public service enterprises, and a Third Level Domain within this SLD is intended to be related to these enterprises and their activities. These may include, as non-exhaustive examples, charities, trades unions, political parties, community groups, educational councils, and professional institutions.

So it would seem that if Nominet decided to have an audit, quite a few .org.uk's could be at risk of cancellation?

 

[namealot]

So it would seem that if Nominet decided to have an audit, quite a few .org.uk's could be at risk of cancellation?

That would mean noms profits take a tumble with all the ones that don't fit the criteria not being regged unlikely…

Making revenue is what counts development is a major part otherwise there very hard to sell to end users….

Extensions were there to identify locations, business etc and had sorts of criteria, Will they eventually mean very little... Or the longer iones and the extra time, power, data storage, etc bit like the “http:/ / and www. ” will likely fade away.

 

[Pred]

nominet have publicly said you can do what you want with .org.uk
i think it was Ty that posted some links to a couple of online sources from nom., quoting

i actually rang them up to doublecheck a couple years back and they confirmed categorically can be used for profit, ecommerce etc. no problems

ring them, they will tell you the same