NOTnominet

Hazel Pegg · Jul 5, 2013

foz · Jul 5, 2013

Not so sure about labeling Graeme and Lucien as "The two protest candidates are".

Surely they can be titled with more dignity? e.g. New or Fresh.

The rest of the sentiments resonate with me.

monaghan · Jul 5, 2013

I would tend to agree with this, to anyone without the bigger picture or who can't be bothered to read up are likely to see this guys in a similar light to the nutters who stand for MP and local council elections.

Hazel Pegg · Jul 5, 2013

foz said:
Not so sure about labeling Graeme and Lucien as "The two protest candidates are".

Surely they can be titled with more dignity? e.g. New or Fresh.

Fair point and amendments made to the page.

murph · Jul 5, 2013

FYI it still calls them "protest candidates"...

Hazel Pegg · Jul 5, 2013

murph said:
FYI it still calls them "protest candidates"...

It says that is what I have dubbed them. Alongside a comment that some protest is needed at this point in time.

murph · Jul 5, 2013

Hazel Pegg said:
It says that is what I have dubbed them. Alongside a comment that some protest is needed at this point in time.

Just in case you'd missed it! Great read by the way, was unaware about the registrar taking expired domains...

GreyWing · Jul 5, 2013

Cheers for the words guys, it's fine for us to be known as protest candidates anyway. Our thoughts are that it separates us from the others. In normal times it may look odd, but in these times it is accurate.

I appreciate people looking out for us, from my point of view and in the context of this years campaign it's fine by me. I have said similar in my election statement to be honest. Hazel has been very helpful in things and indeed rightly gave us both a kick up the backside yesterday to make progress in putting out the message.

Cheers
GW

foz · Jul 5, 2013

Hazel Pegg said:
Fair point and amendments made to the page.

Jolly good.

bluerock · Jul 5, 2013

Quite ironic that independent.uk is reserved for the gov!

Lucien Taylor · Jul 5, 2013

More than ironic, 'reserved' by who and on what legal basis? I can't spot any.

As the government recently confirmed Nominet is a private company limited by guarantee, regulated by its members. The reserved names belong to the company, and civil servants have no claim on them at all, as far as I can see.

Things have to be transparent and accountable nowadays, you can't just give stuff to the government (or rather certain departments within the government) without a proper transparent process. What is that process?

Stephen · Jul 6, 2013

Nominet's V2.0 .uk proposal - what to do?

Thanks for making the effort to bring these matters to light.

My efforts are being directed to Nominet's V2.0 .uk proposal.

There is currently great apathy, fatigue and general acceptance of Nominet’s V2.0 .uk proposal at Acorn.

It maybe because it is seems fair, favours domainers or the best Nominet will provide, I’m not sure.

What I believe is the Nominet proposal by itself does not tell the whole story about creating .uk.

I have started a thread on Acorn:
http://www.acorndomains.co.uk/uk-domain-name-consultations/117195-uk-v2-0-questions-nominet-their-answers.html

which is trying to provide questions, that if answered would provide a more complete view of what should happen with .uk and maybe provide some changes if it did go ahead, to make it fairer and prevent or reduce some of the problems .uk would create.

Whether you are “for .uk” or “against .uk”, I would be grateful if you would look at the questions raised in post #1 and contribute to the thread.

I think with Edwin’s departure from the.uk debate (see page 9 post # 87) at Acorn recently, is a serious blow and it means some more people will have to get involved, if the full story is to be provided to the other stakeholders.

I hope you and anybody reading this thread can help, by adding to the list of questions Nominet should answer about the new .uk V2.0 proposal.

Lucien Taylor · Jul 6, 2013

Thank you Stephen, for your huge effort, and really constructive project to put together a list of strategic questions. I have read through your thread and am now framing my thoughts on the Nominet-Gov-Reserved names issue into a couple of questions which I hope you will add to the list.

As you are striving to keep your thread strictly related to framing questions I will keep the discussion off that thread. But I am interested in the discussing this. I think the relationship between Nominet and the Government is 'unsatisfactory' - to quote my MP. This reserving domain names without a proper transparent process says it all. It's unhealthy. It softens the regulation that a monopoly having its biggest customers on its board would otherwise be attracting, and establishes power bases for the old executive as they pay for more and more worthy government events.

For me, I think that this is what Nominet's problems are all about. And always have been.

markb · Jul 9, 2013

Hazel Pegg said:
I've revived www.notnominet.org.uk

Can I just say on your notnominet page, you have stated as issue 2 that the direct .uk is a done deal, you said " Clearly a 'done deal' as the Govt has reserved a few names for their own use". I have been informed by someone who works for nominet that the government hasn't requested that the names on that linked page are reserved for them. The decision to reserve the names was nominets decision.

markb · Jul 9, 2013

Lucien Taylor said:
More than ironic, 'reserved' by who and on what legal basis? I can't spot any.

As the government recently confirmed Nominet is a private company limited by guarantee, regulated by its members. The reserved names belong to the company, and civil servants have no claim on them at all, as far as I can see.

Things have to be transparent and accountable nowadays, you can't just give stuff to the government (or rather certain departments within the government) without a proper transparent process. What is that process?

Hi Lucien, the reserved names directly effects myself as I am the owner of food.co.uk. Food.uk is supposedly being reserved for the government. Please note I have spoken directly to someone at nominet, and they have stated that that no-one in government has asked for this domain to be reserved for them, the decision to reserve the names have been taken by nominet directly.

Nominet have also said they will quite happily give me the contact details of an appropriate person in the Food Standards Agency department so I can contact them to see if I can talk to them directly about this. I cannot see how this would work if they are probably not even aware of the ".uk" proposals and what it means to them. Also, if nominet have given/reserved this domain for them to use, then I cannot see why they would be interested in letting me have first opportunity to acquire it. By nominet reserving the domain on their behalf, this encourages them not to even look for or think about using an alternative domain as they have already been given one.

Alien · Jul 9, 2013

Hazel Pegg said:
I've revived www.notnominet.org.uk

Just curious why you used a .org.uk?

Why not .com, .org, etc?

anthony · Jul 9, 2013

Alien said:
Just curious why you used a .org.uk?

Why not .com, .org, etc?

Because it's not nominet.org.uk perhaps? ;-)

Alien · Jul 9, 2013

anthony said:
Because it's not nominet.org.uk perhaps? ;-)

My thoughts being should Nominet wish to 'intervene' with the domain name/site etc, it would be simpler for them?

Whereas if it was .com etc, it's outside of their 'authority'?

Nigel · Jul 9, 2013

markb said:
Hi Lucien, the reserved names directly effects myself as I am the owner of food.co.uk. Food.uk is supposedly being reserved for the government. Please note I have spoken directly to someone at nominet, and they have stated that that no-one in government has asked for this domain to be reserved for them, the decision to reserve the names have been taken by nominet directly.

Nominet have also said they will quite happily give me the contact details of an appropriate person in the Food Standards Agency department so I can contact them to see if I can talk to them directly about this. I cannot see how this would work if they are probably not even aware of the ".uk" proposals and what it means to them. Also, if nominet have given/reserved this domain for them to use, then I cannot see why they would be interested in letting me have first opportunity to acquire it. By nominet reserving the domain on their behalf, this encourages them not to even look for or think about using an alternative domain as they have already been given one.

Maybe I'm a cynic but I find it hard to believe that nominet have reserved all these prime domains for govt departments, without any request, or involvement, of the departments themselves. Have you got this in writing from the nominet employee you spoke to? Is it possible perhaps that there is a govt official who has been acting on behalf of all the 150 departments that will get the reserved domains?

markb · Jul 9, 2013

Nigel said:
Maybe I'm a cynic but I find it hard to believe that nominet have reserved all these prime domains for govt departments, without any request, or involvement, of the departments themselves. Have you got this in writing from the nominet employee you spoke to? Is it possible perhaps that there is a govt official who has been acting on behalf of all the 150 departments that will get the reserved domains?

No I didn't get it in writing, it was via phone call. But i'm sure if the question is asked at a round table meeting they will say the same. I'm sure she was telling me the truth.

Where do you get 150 departments from? The document I have seen lists 41 domain names.