.UK Announced

[GreyWing]

Just seen this - author unknown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD6vIHG_R-w&feature=youtu.be

But have sent my MP and asked to retweet to other MP's

 

[addz123]

Just seen this - author unknown

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PD6vIHG_R-w&feature=youtu.be

But have sent my MP and asked to retweet to other MP's

Great video.

Adam

 

[GreyWing]

Great video.

Adam

Wasn't mine this time mate, don't know who owns that account or what other videos are to come.

Couldn't possibly comment

 

[TinkyWinky]

Forwarding to my local MP - who is Scottish Secretary of State!! He is usually pretty good at forwarding and also replying.

TW

 

[WaftyCrank]

Anyone seen the new government domain? GOV.uk? There's also NHS.uk too.

 

[simondooner]

An excellent video from the people at That.co.uk… well done.

If the “direct.uk” Nominet initiative is implemented and it does require an additional £200 - £300 Million (plus) simply for UK business to stand still, where will all that hard earned cash come from?

Certainly not the banks… I suspect it will come from existing business budgets at the expense of something else… jobs perhaps.

On a day when Michael Heseltine releases a report calling for action to stimulate the UK economy, what does all this say about Nominet’s grasp of the bigger economic picture?

 

[Murray]

Anyone seen the new government domain? GOV.uk? There's also NHS.uk too.

It should stay that way.. .uk, just for official government sites.

 

[WealdDomains]

It feels like our activities are bubbling around the following areas :
- straightforwardly improving awareness of the Nominet proposal and consultation exercise
- actively sharing objective critical analysis of the proposal
- pursuing personal viewpoints and agendas

Hopefully we can all agree on at least the first of those angles as a minimum, and ideally the second too. Over the last couple of days, I have tried to achieve that through sharing information on an internal intranet associated with my non-domaining "day job", a personal post on Facebook to my friends and LinkedIn posts to my connections and to the members of a relevant community group. You may wish to consider doing the same. I have tailored the terminology for each audience, but you may wish to consider building on this general text :

"I have been struggling to work through the implications of the recent Nominet proposal for the creation of .uk domain names - see http://www.nominet.org.uk for more details. Many of you will recognise Edwin Hayward as a major figure in the UK domain name industry. I have found his analysis at http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/ is a very helpful way to understand the potential implications. I am very concerned at what is proposed and I strongly recommend that you read Edwin's paper as part of your own analysis prior to providing formal feedback to Nominet. You may also wish to attend one of the sessions that Nominet are arranging to discuss this further.

David Collison (these views are my own as the owner of Weald Domains and are not related to any other positions that I hold)"

Regards, David

 

[julian]

.,..........................

 

[julian]

Not the nonsense agaion. In this thing called business its just tough shit.

So much whinging here - yes businesses will have to pay to rebrand - its not compulsory to have to rebrand or get the .UK

you can't have everything in life you know..

They should have thought of that before they got 9,000,000 users to brand their .co.uk for them, the cost of re-branding now is massive and who is going to pay ? the consumer. Who is going to profit ? the entity that made the mistake in the first place.
.

Is it profiteering ? I think it may well be.

 

[websaway]

.,..........................

Are you sure you are not missing something julian ?

It's like government saying we're allowing someone to park their caravan in your back garden and you saying "oh well that's life I suppose".

You are at heart a pessimist and that may be because of the way you approach issues mentally.

 

[TinkyWinky]

you can't have everything in life you know..

Thanks for that Julian - nothing like supporting a bunch of bullying penpushers then!

It's not about having everything - it's about a fair process - something you are obviously quite happy to stick your head in the sand on!

How can this be a fair process when the vested interests of the "voters with the most power" stand to make millions out of UK businesses like yours and everyone elses on this board.

Unless we all opposes the way this is being railroaded in, what's next... we have to go buy .gb and .england.

There is absoltuely NO NEED to do .uk. Simple as. Everything is smoke and mirrors to make money and for some personal glory!

I think you get my point. This is about the bigger picture not inidividual interests (for most).

 

[julian]

No.. its only greedy portfolio holders who might lose out who care about this proposal mostly.

I'd bet 95% of the people on this forum have never spent more than £500 on domain so I don't kno what their flappign about..

As someone with over 1000 .uk domains you might find it strange that I take this stance but the fact is .co.uk is in reality a pile of shit and .uk is better. (the only problem is what after .UK few years down the line - .GB is obviously a logical step in the future - whens it goign to end?).

With this proposal I might have to accept I have potentially lost tens of thousands of pounds in investments over the years and move on to a fresh start. This is what business is about taking risks - you win some you lose some - its just like a mini version of the stock market here you could say.

Now.. i've had ample opportunity to sell my domains for 5x, 10x, 100x more than I paid for them but as greedy domainer shite I decided not, and to and hang on for the lotto payday offer - anyway that'll perhaps learn me (and some others I bet).

If you've got any brains you'll look at this as one big f@ck-off, self funded business lesson and make some better plans for the next round of fun..

Are you sure you are not missing something julian ?

It's like government saying we're allowing someone to park their caravan in your back garden and you saying "oh well that's life I suppose".

You are at heart a pessimist and that may be because of the way you approach issues mentally.

 

[websaway]

No.. its only greedy portfolio holders who might lose out who care about this proposal mostly.

I'd bet 95% of the people on this forum have never spent more than £500 on domain so I don't kno what their flappign about..

As someone with over 1000 .uk domains you might find it strange that I take this stance but the fact is .co.uk is in reality a pile of shit and .uk is better. (the only problem is what after .UK few years down the line - .GB is obviously a logical step in the future - whens it goign to end?).

With this proposal I might have to accept I have potentially lost tens of thousands of pounds in investments over the years and move on to a fresh start. This is what business is about taking risks - you win some you lose some - its just like a mini version of the stock market here you could say.

Now.. i've had ample opportunity to sell my domains for 5x, 10x, 100x more than I paid for them but as greedy domainer shite I decided not, and to and hang on for the lotto payday offer - anyway that'll perhaps learn me (and some others I bet).

If you've got any brains you'll look at this as one big f@ck-off, self funded business lesson and make some better plans for the next round of fun..

Grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change.
The courage to change the things I can.
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Julian with your attitude you are self defeating and almost bound to lose next time aswell.

 

[julian]

Perhaps.. but at least i've accepted i'm a loser - we can't all be

Big Dick Players like you

Julian with your attitude you are self defeating and almost bound to lose next time aswell.

 

[websaway]

I think I can assure you you're not a very good judge of people either.

Anyway we are losing the thread I won't come back on this again.

 

[viceroy]

No.. its only greedy portfolio holders who might lose out who care about this proposal mostly.

I disagree, it's 'the greedy portfolio holders' who will lose out but the multitude of small businesses and a lot of medium and large businesses will lose out a lot more. Portfolio holders might have to reduce their paper profits or valuations but when small company xyz.co.uk has to spend their limited resources to counter xyz.uk (think legal fees, drs cases, confusion over email addresses, losing out to traffic leakage, brand dilution, etc.) and there'll be serious impacts and how many cases?
I think that by not making everyone (registrants, businesses, etc.) aware of the implications is a bit irresponsible considering Nominet is supposed to represent all stakeholders and not just the ones 'that have subscribed to the policy updates newsletter' or 'checked the policy pages on [their] website if they're interested in the domain industry'.

 

[simondooner]

I’m sure most are aware of Angus Hanton’s resignation from the Nominet board in 2008 but the details are well worth re-reading especially in the light of the current Nominet proposals.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/13/nominet_director_resigns/

In his resignation letter Angus Hanton wrote: "The company [Nominet] is meant to be controlled by, and answerable to, its membership as well as having duties to the wider community. My firm impression is that some other directors would like to eliminate the membership's control of the organisation and are not committed to the company's not-for-profit objectives."

Interestingly, Angus Hanton has also submitted a number of Freedom of Information requests concerning the proposals for .uk. Answers, if any will be available in a couple of week’s time.

See here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nominets_proposals_for_uk

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_did_bis_transfer_uk_to_nomin

 

[websaway]

I’m sure most are aware of Angus Hanton’s resignation from the Nominet board in 2008 but the details are well worth re-reading especially in the light of the current Nominet proposals.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/13/nominet_director_resigns/

In his resignation letter Angus Hanton wrote: "The company [Nominet] is meant to be controlled by, and answerable to, its membership as well as having duties to the wider community. My firm impression is that some other directors would like to eliminate the membership's control of the organisation and are not committed to the company's not-for-profit objectives."

Interestingly, Angus Hanton has also submitted a number of Freedom of Information requests concerning the proposals for .uk. Answers, if any will be available in a couple of week’s time.

See here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nominets_proposals_for_uk

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_did_bis_transfer_uk_to_nomin

Thanks

 

[anthony]

I’m sure most are aware of Angus Hanton’s resignation from the Nominet board in 2008 but the details are well worth re-reading especially in the light of the current Nominet proposals.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/13/nominet_director_resigns/

In his resignation letter Angus Hanton wrote: "The company [Nominet] is meant to be controlled by, and answerable to, its membership as well as having duties to the wider community. My firm impression is that some other directors would like to eliminate the membership's control of the organisation and are not committed to the company's not-for-profit objectives."

Interestingly, Angus Hanton has also submitted a number of Freedom of Information requests concerning the proposals for .uk. Answers, if any will be available in a couple of week’s time.

See here:

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/nominets_proposals_for_uk

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/how_did_bis_transfer_uk_to_nomin

In respect of the Angus's second request, I can quote the following from a 1998 study carried out into the transition from the UK Naming Committee to the creation of Nominet UK:

"...This initiative was entirely industry based with little or no government involvement. This was perceived by participants in the process as giving social, political, and cognitive legitimacy to the new organization. The UK government’s interest had focused on the extent to which user interests, business and individual, would be adequately represented in the restructuring process. According to the former head of Infrastructure and Convergence Policy at the Department of Trade and Industry, ‘the key issue is that the registry system be open, transparent, and objective; which Nominet is’ (interview, 13 May 1998 ). The Nominet approach was regarded as a good model reflecting a pragmatic industry decision.

The perception of the parties concerned with Nominet was that it was inclusive; it prevented the interests of any entity from dominating the process..."