Why do we keep pretending?

[julian]

Me confused about two issues.. and members positions..

1.

I'm trying to examine whether after you strip all the detritus away, forget who gets what, who makes money out of it, release mechanisms etc, etc, (because if you have an issue with those then you must be putting self interest before the greater good of .UK name space? That is not criticism just an observation).

So from a long term usability, vanity and credibility point of view - why is a .UK extension NOT the way forward?

There will never be a 'perfect' proposal that everyone agrees on.

2.

I can't understand how nobody seems to accept that if .UK does not now go ahead, uncertainty will fester and remain in the .uk market almost indefinitely.

It feels like people are sticking their head in the sand. They want to wake up and find Nominet have scrapped .UK, the sun will come out, confidence and the status quo returns..

-=The End=-

 

[Murray]

So from a long term usability, vanity and credibility point of view - why is a .UK extension NOT the way forward?

I'm sure you've already read the reasons why people believe .uk isn't needed and how/why it would cause problems.

Edwin touching on all the major points in his response - http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/v2response2.pdf

Id be interested to hear more from your stance if you could further explain your reasoning beyond one sentence.

 

[monaghan]

I don't have an issue with .uk, what I do have the issue with is how you can get from the wide range of current .uk subdomains down to a single .uk top level. If there was only the few Nominet managed subdomains, but there's all the others like .ac.uk that are being excluded. I just don't see how it is practical to run .uk alongside the existing names without causing major confusion to the general public.

If it was s simple rename, then fine, let's suffer the grief and get it over with, but we already have a very rich range of .uk subdomains already and there's overlap that is not going to go away. There are issues that people are running business on the non-profit .org.uk and personal .me.uk, but that's due to the lack of control over the registration process.

If there are insufficient names, why not embrace this multi-level structure we have and add more to it rather than close it down further forcing people to either register a non-preferred version of their name or taking their business away from Nominet to another TLD?

There have been many calls for information, but Nominet have yet to prove that there is genuine demand for these proposed changes, not simply tell us there is but give us a real case. If there was published evidence and a proper case, then perhaps the community might work together to make it happen, but as it stands it is just seen as a cash cow to fund the board's next bonus pot.

 

[julian]

I'm still confused..

Correct me if I'm wrong but the majority of people on this forum are business people who at the end of the day make money out of buying, developing and selling domain names. So why do I get this feeling there's a kind of false sense of altruism but I can't workout what the higher purpose is - is there some very clever maneuvering going on..?

The majority of domainers (sorry I had to use that term, it's like a dagger in my heart too) would not lose out with the current release mechanism (I except there would be some collateral). So since when have 'domainers' cared about the public, or how or why Joe Bloggs.org.uk might be affected.

Why would you not want to enhance your portfolio with the 'premium' .UK - a better extension, I can only think cost is the reason.

There's nothing wrong with making money, Nominet are allowed to do that. The making money is just a natural off shot of the whole process, I don't believe that the point that Nominet are making lots money is a reason for it not to go ahead. If everyone here was 100% in favour of .UK would we still be complaining about Nominet's cash cow?

I wondered if Nominet paired the .UK domain free to the longest existing registrant would it solve the cash cow/greed issue.

Finally I don't buy into the fact about issues of confusion. It's just seems pathetic excuse to me to say that people will get confused and the two extensions can't exist side by side. Here's a story. In my dotage I still must be reasonably competent Internet user. There's a site I like to use called archive.org, very useful but I swear on my kids lives I've typed in archive.org.uk and cursed the screen a good few times. It's a weak example, just a point about mollycoddling. I think users are more savvy

Just getting back to original rant, pulling apart these proposals any which way you like is fine, but the reasons highlighted for it not to go ahead, to me, aren't critical enough for it not to go ahead, if that makes sense.

 

[Edwin]

Julian, the fact that you're on this forum at all (regardless of your interest in the domain industry) puts your tech skills ahead of about 99% of internet users, so it's impossible to get a feel for how any change would impact users by considering how it would impact you.

The confusion issue is very real. It has been highlighted by enough disinterested parties (i.e. not domain industry insiders) to "prove" that's the case.

If .uk goes ahead, it will damage:
- Trust in the UK namespace in general (hurts all extensions)
- Trust in .co.uk
- Trust in Nominet (uncertain impact, but can't be good)

It will dilute the UK namespace - suddenly, instead of .co.uk being the be-all-end-all business extension, they've got to worry about .uk as well.

It will also make the UK namespace less secure, with more phishing attacks, misdirected emails (which have expensive consequences - one company got fined £120,000 for just 3 instances of confidential emails going astray) etc.

You can bet that will hurt domain investors as much as it will hurt businesses and the general public. Not to mention that the "carrying cost" for a portfolio of names will triple. I doubt there are many people operating in this industry who can laugh off that sort of increase in costs.

For every 1,000 names in your portfolio, the costs (assuming multi-year registrations) look like this:
.co.uk only: £3,000/year carrying costs
.co.uk plus .uk pair: £8,400/year carrying costs

In other words, for every 1,000 names in inventory, domain investors will have to find an additional £5,400 a year to maintain "parity" (since the "new" .co.uk to be sold will be the .co.uk+.uk pair)

Plus, regardless of how cynical you may be feeling, there are times when something is so obviously wrong that it feels really good to make a stand, regardless of personal win/loss!

 

[max_rk]

It will also make the UK namespace less secure, with more phishing attacks, misdirected emails (which have expensive consequences - one company got fined £120,000 for just 3 instances of confidential emails going astray) etc.

Do you have more details of this?

 

[Edwin]

Do you have more details of this?

Yes, it's all in my report.
http://www.mydomainnames.co.uk/v2response2.pdf

 

[Murray]

Finally I don't buy into the fact about issues of confusion.

Say you owned domain.org.uk, you managed to get domain.uk

You rebranded and marketed domain.uk

How much of your type in traffic do you think would end up at domain.co.uk instead (which was owned by someone else)

I could easily imagine 1/4

The general public wont know and wont care about the release of .uk

Can you imagine them typing in the wrong email too? I can, and even if they did get it right and type in [email protected], they may well take a second look at it and think "hang on that looks wrong, silly me I missed out the .co" add, it, ends up going to the wrong place.

The only way I think .uk could be released without confusion is if it was paired with the co.uk.

But I also think .uk isn't needed, so it would effectively be a forced added expense (assuming you had to pay extra for it)

I would prefer something new was released, like .en or .gb

I don't think anyone would have a problem is something new, takes out all the confusion, co.uk keeps its prestige and a new flashy short domain becomes available.

 

[Edwin]

BTW I have a whole section in my report covering how Nominet might achieve a number of its stated aims without resorting to .uk at all - I'm not just nay-saying!

 

[Sound]

Plus, regardless of how cynical you may be feeling, there are times when something is so obviously wrong that it feels really good to make a stand, regardless of personal win/loss!

Edwin you have spent the last three months singing the praises of Nominet's V2 and comparing it with your own version telling everyone who would listen that .uk was inevitable and that V2 was the best answer moving forward.

Then at the eleventh hour after endlessly complaining of being bulled when others raised valid points suddenly switch with venom to the say no to .uk camp

 

[Edwin]

Nonsense. Do you really think a report like mine writes itself? I was happier for V2 for a few days (chalk that up to elation that we didn't get V1) then I stepped back after some vicious personal attacks were made and got quietly on with collecting the material for my report until I was ready to publish it.

Absent that report (with its substantiated sources) I'm just another talking head on a blog/forum.

That is what will be in the permanent public record, and that is what my "position" is.

 

[Edwin]

BTW ask ANYONE who was in the face to face sessions what my position on .uk is. I doubt you'll find a harsher critic.

 

[max_rk]

Edwin you have spent the last three months singing the praises of Nominet's V2 and comparing it with your own version telling everyone who would listen that .uk was inevitable and that V2 was the best answer moving forward.

Then at the eleventh hour after endlessly complaining of being bulled when others raised valid points suddenly switch with venom to the say no to .uk camp

I am not Edwin’s advocate but I believe anyone on this forum entitled to an opinion and entitled to change their the opinion. If you don’t like other’s opinions and what some say you can stop reading those post.

Its not about what corner who takes, it’s just a debate.

Edwin and many other members here bring opinions, comments, views to discussion. I was against .uk since 2004, I been banging from very beginning about the confusion it would couse but I am grateful to Edwin and many other members who shared their views. If I would change my mind that also would be ok, issues are complex.

Max Karpis

 

[Edwin]

Oh and stories like this one (12 July) came as a direct result of my blog posts on the subject
http://econsultancy.com/uk/blog/630...uk-domains-but-do-businesses-really-need-them

 

[monaghan]

I'm still confused..

Correct me if I'm wrong but the majority of people on this forum are business people who at the end of the day make money out of buying, developing and selling domain names. So why do I get this feeling there's a kind of false sense of altruism but I can't workout what the higher purpose is - is there some very clever maneuvering going on..?

If you are looking at this on a purely selfish financial basis, then yes, let's go for .uk and grab what cash we can out of it, however, not everyone who has an interest in domain names and the Internet is in it for greed, some of us do actually consider the end user and the customer. My customers are a combination of "domainers", business & personal customers, I also trade a few domains for personal gain.

I can re-sell a .uk to my current .co.uk customers and take the profit, however, whether this is actually of business benefit to my customer is my concern. If Nominet can prove that there is a demand led business case for .UK, then I'm more than happy to provide my customers additional domains and necessary consultancy to implement these in the best way, but to simply sell them an additional domain to duplicate an existing "business" .co.uk domain that they already have does not seem ethical, however, if they don't buy the .uk potentially someone else will in order to gain financial advantage (either by putting a competing shop or selling on the domain), so they are in effect blackmailed into shelling out for the .uk for something they don't actually need.

Large portfolio holders will have to shell out for the duplicates and I guess those with lots of borderline value domains and small budgets will take the opportunity to review their portfolios so there may be a shuffling of some less valuable names around the domainers, but I don't really see any significant release of actual usable or desirable domains back into the general pool of unregistered names.

I really fail to see what it actually does for anyone other than raising cash for registrars and Nominet and perhaps a few consultants.

If there were only a small number of domains currently registered, then perhaps it might be worth the effort, but there are many millions of .uk names to process.

 

[websaway]

I'm still confused..

Correct me if I'm wrong but the majority of people on this forum are business people who at the end of the day make money out of buying, developing and selling domain names. So why do I get this feeling there's a kind of false sense of altruism but I can't workout what the higher purpose is - is there some very clever maneuvering going on..?

The majority of domainers (sorry I had to use that term, it's like a dagger in my heart too) would not lose out with the current release mechanism (I except there would be some collateral). So since when have 'domainers' cared about the public, or how or why Joe Bloggs.org.uk might be affected.

Why would you not want to enhance your portfolio with the 'premium' .UK - a better extension, I can only think cost is the reason.

There's nothing wrong with making money, Nominet are allowed to do that. The making money is just a natural off shot of the whole process, I don't believe that the point that Nominet are making lots money is a reason for it not to go ahead. If everyone here was 100% in favour of .UK would we still be complaining about Nominet's cash cow?

I wondered if Nominet paired the .UK domain free to the longest existing registrant would it solve the cash cow/greed issue.

Finally I don't buy into the fact about issues of confusion. It's just seems pathetic excuse to me to say that people will get confused and the two extensions can't exist side by side. Here's a story. In my dotage I still must be reasonably competent Internet user. There's a site I like to use called archive.org, very useful but I swear on my kids lives I've typed in archive.org.uk and cursed the screen a good few times. It's a weak example, just a point about mollycoddling. I think users are more savvy

Just getting back to original rant, pulling apart these proposals any which way you like is fine, but the reasons highlighted for it not to go ahead, to me, aren't critical enough for it not to go ahead, if that makes sense.

Why not have a dictatorship instead of a democratic government.
I'm sure you could convince yourself it is better.

Nominet set out on a "war of attrition" and it's difficult to fight.

 

[websaway]

If you are looking at this on a purely selfish financial basis, then yes, let's go for .uk and grab what cash we can out of it, however, not everyone who has an interest in domain names and the Internet is in it for greed, some of us do actually consider the end user and the customer. My customers are a combination of "domainers", business & personal customers, I also trade a few domains for personal gain.

I can re-sell a .uk to my current .co.uk customers and take the profit, however, whether this is actually of business benefit to my customer is my concern. If Nominet can prove that there is a demand led business case for .UK, then I'm more than happy to provide my customers additional domains and necessary consultancy to implement these in the best way, but to simply sell them an additional domain to duplicate an existing "business" .co.uk domain that they already have does not seem ethical, however, if they don't buy the .uk potentially someone else will in order to gain financial advantage (either by putting a competing shop or selling on the domain), so they are in effect blackmailed into shelling out for the .uk for something they don't actually need.

Large portfolio holders will have to shell out for the duplicates and I guess those with lots of borderline value domains and small budgets will take the opportunity to review their portfolios so there may be a shuffling of some less valuable names around the domainers, but I don't really see any significant release of actual usable or desirable domains back into the general pool of unregistered names.

I really fail to see what it actually does for anyone other than raising cash for registrars and Nominet and perhaps a few consultants.

If there were only a small number of domains currently registered, then perhaps it might be worth the effort, but there are many millions of .uk names to process.

Good God, what a fantastic post.

 

[donreeco]

I agree with Julian's points. Completely forgetting release mechanisms/nominet/costs etc - .uk is just better.

Typing .co.uk is long winded. Especially on (ever increasing) mobile. I'll sometimes google a site, in the Chrome address bar, without the extension, then click the first result, because I can't be bothered typing the full url with .co.uk.

I also think keyword+.uk makes for a much better brand name, than keyword+.co.uk. The latter has always felt clumsy compared to .com, in cases where the domain+extension IS the brand.

 

[Murray]

I agree with Julian's points. Completely forgetting release mechanisms/nominet/costs etc - .uk is just better.

Typing .co.uk is long winded. Especially on (ever increasing) mobile. I'll sometimes google a site, in the Chrome address bar, without the extension, then click the first result, because I can't be bothered typing the full url with .co.uk.

I also think keyword+.uk makes for a much better brand name, than keyword+.co.uk. The latter has always felt clumsy compared to .com, in cases where the domain+extension IS the brand.

Yes, .uk is shorter and nicer, no one would disagree with that.

But the actual real world implications of releasing it aren't worth it, just because "it's better"

The co.uk bed has been laid in.

.en or .gb would also be good, without the problems.

 

[Sound]

The best solution I have seen is from the www.openrightsgroup.org

I like the idea of .UK being independent from .co.uk


"One option is to separate the process for second level .uk registration from Nominet. If this .uk proposal must go ahead, we suggest that it should be run by a different body and that Nominet should not benefit commercially from it. This will at least promote competition."

This would make a lot of sense and please a lot more people going forward unfortunately it will never happen.