.UK Announced

[foz]

Phil is very skilled at what he does, which in large part seems to consist of deflecting criticism by giving "something that looks superficially like an answer, but isn't" so that the busy journalist in question goes away satisfied without digging further. Great PR work (and no, I'm not being sarcastic - it's because he's so good that it's so hard to get any of the facts of the matter to stick)

You're to kind. Surely after hearing the feedback from the meetings, how one could still spell out only the positives without acknowledging the negatives is unscrupulous.

 

[Edwin]

You're to kind. Surely after hearing the feedback from the meetings, how one could still spell out only the positives without acknowledging the negatives is unscrupulous.

No, it literally is his job. That's what he's paid to do: paint the best possible picture (like any good PR person would). The unscrupulousness (if any) happens at a higher decision level. I don't wish Phil any ill will at all - but I intend to keep countering his disinformation whenever I am able.

 

[Stephen]

Full submission

Nominet seem to be trying to dodge my email. I received this reply from Leanne Kenny: "Thank you for your email. The information you have highlighted below will be considered along with your original submission. Your feedback, together with the feedback received throughout the consultation period will be reflected in the summary that will be sent to the Board."

So I sent it individually to each Nominet Board member (well, all but 2 - I've asked Leanne to pass it on to them with a note that the others have already received their copy). Whether they actually read any of it is another matter, but at least I know the Board will have seen it.

Good well done. Lets hear if you get any feedback,thanks or questions from them. I have not received a single email from the board or executive or direct.uk team with any questions from my document "What is wrong with the Nominet .uk proposal?" after it was sent to all Nominet board members.

Note Eleanor Bradley is now a Board member.

I intend to still submit full copies of each important document for the record, in case full submissions ever get published or we obtain a review by an independent party of the summary if required.

 

[Stephen]

Media

Phil is very skilled at what he does, which in large part seems to consist of deflecting criticism by giving "something that looks superficially like an answer, but isn't" so that the busy journalist in question goes away satisfied without digging further. Great PR work (and no, I'm not being sarcastic - it's because he's so good that it's so hard to get any of the facts of the matter to stick)

If he was really skilled (and correct) we would have lots of media articles about how the Nominet .uk bold move was going to keep us all out of recession in the UK and make millions of jobs etc!

As you say we can only try to get the TRUTH OUT THERE.

 

[Stephen]

unscrupulous?

You're to kind. Surely after hearing the feedback from the meetings, how one could still spell out only the positives without acknowledging the negatives is unscrupulous.

Agree at "unscrupulous" considering the damage that will be done to the UK economy and an increase in cybercrime.

It makes me happy that I can follow what I believe is right to do, rather than be a salaried person following orders whatever the consequences may be for so many other people that I haven't even tried to contact.

 

[foz]

Being a good liar is not a trait worthy of praise IMO.

 

[Stephen]

.wales withdraw?

Sorry to bring into this thread the Nominet proposal for .wales again but please read this.

As I believe they are connected in providing evidence on how badly Nominet have handled .uk.

Furthermore taking out the ability for Nominet to issue new second level
domains such as .wales.uk which would have saved over £1 million and the annual ongoing fee to ICANN for .wales. (as mentioned by invincible - several times on this thread - saying Nominet were not looking to the future)

The benefits according to the economic report would still be possible but done in a cheaper method by providing the geo tld .wales.uk

After reading the economic study, I would question Nominet's authority to spend money launching .wales as it would not benefit the UK stakeholders at all, it simply redistributes the money around in favour of the welsh businesses at the expense of other UK businesses. Plus if it fails it will put finanacial pressure on nominet.

Unless Nominet have .wales finances underwritten/subsidized by the Welsh governement and can answer the case how it benefits the whole of the UK namespace there is a case for Nominet to withdraw its application for .wales!

 

[foz]

direct.uk is selling the virtue of a shorter URL in .uk, when .wales is the same as typing .co.uk

Just because a new product is coming (the new gTLDs), doesn't mean they will be significantly understood, accepted and registered in large numbers. The Nominet board seem to be terrified of them.

.nz recently launched .kiwi.nz - only 7,685 registered thus far, less than 1.5% of total .nz registrations.

 

[websaway]

direct.uk is selling the virtue of a shorter URL in .uk, when .wales is the same as typing .co.uk

Just because a new product is coming (the new gTLDs), doesn't mean they will be significantly understood, accepted and registered in large numbers. The Nominet board seem to be terrified of them.

.nz recently launched .kiwi.nz - only 7,685 registered thus far, less than 1.5% of total .nz registrations.

Had to smile when I noticed

google.jp directs to google.co.jp

just about sums it all up.

 

[foz]

Sorry to bring into this thread the Nominet proposal for .wales again but please read this.

As I believe they are connected in providing evidence on how badly Nominet have handled .uk.

Furthermore taking out the ability for Nominet to issue new second level
domains such as .wales.uk which would have saved over £1 million and the annual ongoing fee to ICANN for .wales. (as mentioned by invincible - several times on this thread - saying Nominet were not looking to the future)

The benefits according to the economic report would still be possible but done in a cheaper method by providing the geo tld .wales.uk

After reading the economic study, I would question Nominet's authority to spend money launching .wales as it would not benefit the UK stakeholders at all, it simply redistributes the money around in favour of the welsh businesses at the expense of other UK businesses. Plus if it fails it will put finanacial pressure on nominet.

Unless Nominet have .wales finances underwritten/subsidized by the Welsh governement and can answer the case how it benefits the whole of the UK namespace there is a case for Nominet to withdraw its application for .wales!

Nominet for sure has put more effort into researching .wales than the direct.uk consultation. Offering .wales.uk would be far more cost effective to Nominet than pursuing .wales.

 

[websaway]

A thought

Would the world wide web have become the phenomenom it is today without domainers. The likes of Jackson and schilling and our own Edwin Hayward.

 

[Stephen]

Turn back time

A thought
Would the world wide web have become the phenomenom it is today without domainers. The likes of Jackson and schilling and our own Edwin Hayward.

It is pity Nominet did not start by asking for creative ideas from the domaining community
on how to deal with the changes in the domain world and the wider world of internet use,
mobile use and cybercrime for the benefit of UK consumers and businesses
rather than the Nominet ill-conceived 1 size fits all solution of .uk,
which has created such a negative outlook for the UK namepsace.

Maybe as it's Christmas and we have seen gesture of goodwill with anti-Nominet videos removed
we might see a goodwill guesture from Nominet, like saying they will publish all the .uk proposal feedback?
or they are starting again and want to look a variety of new solutions to the varied
challenges and opportunities the UK namespace faces?
or maybe scrapping the Nominet transfer cost?
or all of the above!

 

[Nigel]

Hi Everyone - haven't been on here for a while. Just to say that Edwin, Stephen and the rest of you deserve a medal for all your efforts. Thought I'd let you know that I have emailed Eleanor Bradley at Nominet over their decision to not even send an email to their existing customers. Whatever your views on direct.uk it is scandalous that many existing customers have no knowledge that this consultation is going on. All the best. Nigel. Here is the email. I'll let you know if, and when, any reply is received.

Dear Ms Bradley

I have watched your video in respect of the proposed introduction of direct.uk. Our company opposes the introduction of this new extension and we have already submitted our feedback. We were very fortunate to hear about the launch of your consultation on 1st October 2012 because we visited a forum where a member had kindly posted details. We know, for certain, that many .co.uk domain registrants still have no idea that this consultation is taking place and I am writing this email to you on their behalf.

In your video you say that you are “really keen to hear feedback” and that you are “going out and speaking to stakeholders and engaging with those people who would be impacted by this change…”. These comments are completely at odds with your decision to not send an email to your millions of existing customers. You know that owners of .co.uk domains are the group most likely to be ‘impacted’ by this change, yet you have deliberately decided, to keep them in the dark about direct.uk. It would have been a fairly simple task for you to email these customers - they certainly deserve to know - and I am sure many would have provided the feedback you say you are looking for. I understand that some of your meetings were very poorly attended and one was cancelled (as only one person responded) which is not surprising if you didn’t invite existing registrants. Please note that I am not using this email to discuss the details of direct.uk but simply for an answer to these three questions:

Who made the decision to not send an email about direct.uk to your existing customers?

Why did you not email your existing customers about direct.uk?

Please provide attendances for the meetings that took place around the country to discuss direct.uk?

I would be grateful if you could provide these three answers urgently. The deadline of 7th January is very close and I am anxious to do all I can for the nominet customers who will be impacted by this change, and who are currently unaware that this consultation is taking place. Thank you.
Yours sincerely

 

[markb]

Nigel, thats an excellent email and very good questions which i'm sure everyone wants to know the answers too. Why are nominet not informing the very people that this will impact the most? Im sure originally someone said it was because if they sent emails out to everyone it would be classed as spamming or some stupid similar excuse, but then nominet set they would send all uk domain owners emails to let them know of the auctions for their corresponding direct.uk domains.

Hi Everyone - haven't been on here for a while. Just to say that Edwin, Stephen and the rest of you deserve a medal for all your efforts. Thought I'd let you know that I have emailed Eleanor Bradley at Nominet over their decision to not even send an email to their existing customers. Whatever your views on direct.uk it is scandalous that many existing customers have no knowledge that this consultation is going on. All the best. Nigel. Here is the email. I'll let you know if, and when, any reply is received.

Dear Ms Bradley

I have watched your video in respect of the proposed introduction of direct.uk. Our company opposes the introduction of this new extension and we have already submitted our feedback. We were very fortunate to hear about the launch of your consultation on 1st October 2012 because we visited a forum where a member had kindly posted details. We know, for certain, that many .co.uk domain registrants still have no idea that this consultation is taking place and I am writing this email to you on their behalf.

In your video you say that you are “really keen to hear feedback” and that you are “going out and speaking to stakeholders and engaging with those people who would be impacted by this change…”. These comments are completely at odds with your decision to not send an email to your millions of existing customers. You know that owners of .co.uk domains are the group most likely to be ‘impacted’ by this change, yet you have deliberately decided, to keep them in the dark about direct.uk. It would have been a fairly simple task for you to email these customers - they certainly deserve to know - and I am sure many would have provided the feedback you say you are looking for. I understand that some of your meetings were very poorly attended and one was cancelled (as only one person responded) which is not surprising if you didn’t invite existing registrants. Please note that I am not using this email to discuss the details of direct.uk but simply for an answer to these three questions:

Who made the decision to not send an email about direct.uk to your existing customers?

Why did you not email your existing customers about direct.uk?

Please provide attendances for the meetings that took place around the country to discuss direct.uk?

I would be grateful if you could provide these three answers urgently. The deadline of 7th January is very close and I am anxious to do all I can for the nominet customers who will be impacted by this change, and who are currently unaware that this consultation is taking place. Thank you.
Yours sincerely

 

[Nigel]

Hi Mark. I'd like to see them put that excuse in writing. Did you see the article on the guardian.co.uk website by nominet's director of marketing - Phil Kingsland. He made this comment:

'We fully appreciate that the .uk proposal represents a significant change to the .uk namespace and we've made considerable efforts to seek views and encourage feedback from a wide range of stakeholders. We've had a strong response to the consultation, both online and at a range of meetings we have hosted around the UK.'

What he should have said is that Nominet made no effort at all to contact existing registrants. Had they wanted feedback then they would have sent existing registrants an email. So the feedback has been paltry (650 formal responses as at 18 December from over 10m registered domains). I have read that the Cardiff meeting had just 4 attendees, and that the Belfast meeting was cancelled because only one person responded. I think the whole consultation is undermined by this treatment of existing registrants.

 

[websaway]

Hi Mark. I'd like to see them put that excuse in writing. Did you see the article on the guardian.co.uk website by nominet's director of marketing - Phil Kingsland. He made this comment:

'We fully appreciate that the .uk proposal represents a significant change to the .uk namespace and we've made considerable efforts to seek views and encourage feedback from a wide range of stakeholders. We've had a strong response to the consultation, both online and at a range of meetings we have hosted around the UK.'

What he should have said is that Nominet made no effort at all to contact existing registrants. Had they wanted feedback then they would have sent existing registrants an email. So the feedback has been paltry (650 formal responses as at 18 December from over 10m registered domains). I have read that the Cardiff meeting had just 4 attendees, and that the Belfast meeting was cancelled because only one person responded. I think the whole consultation is undermined by this treatment of existing registrants.

What's your views on certain board members having possible conflict of interest in the outcome ?

 

[Nigel]

Hi websaway

I don't know much about that - but if that's the case it cannot be right. A decision like this shouldn't rest with a few board members. Each domain should attract one vote. That would be the fair way.

 

[monaghan]

Hi websaway

I don't know much about that - but if that's the case it cannot be right. A decision like this shouldn't rest with a few board members. Each domain should attract one vote. That would be the fair way.

Not sure about 1 vote for each domain, perhaps a vote for each unique registrant would be more representative.

 

[Stephen]

2nd stage

Not sure about 1 vote for each domain, perhaps a vote for each unique registrant would be more representative.

Yes, when Nominet start charging per registrant than per domain, then 1 vote per registrant, until then 1 vote per UK domain (whatever extension)

But serioulsy either way its measured, I'm sure the vast majority of existing registrants
would not favour the current proposal, if they knew about it and it's flaws were explained to them!

I just hope Nominet see sense and consult more, do more research, gather more opionions
on their 2nd plan before putting out to the wider registrants for their views and acceptance, that it is the right way to go.

 

[websaway]

Yes, when Nominet start charging per registrant than per domain, then 1 vote per registrant, until then 1 vote per UK domain (whatever extension)

But serioulsy either way its measured, I'm sure the vast majority of existing registrants
would not favour the current proposal, if they knew about it and it's flaws were explained to them!

I just hope Nominet see sense and consult more, do more research, gather more opionions
on their 2nd plan before putting out to the wider registrants for their views and acceptance it is the right way to go.

I think they should admit their mistakes, abort the whole process and fall on their swords.