I for the most part agree with the concept of under regulation with one
notable exceptions. .edu for one is reserved for accredited educational
institutions. a seperate namespace for public institutions is a
worthwhile thing, since often they do not have the resources to 'fight'
for their domain name. Ie libraries, museums etc. In fact I would not
be adverse to allowing these types of institutuions to obtain .edu domains
since their function is education, though not in as formal sense as a
degree granting institution.
This also works very well IMHO since the last time I checked, an instution
that qualified for a .edu domain did not have to pay for that name. Just
demonstrate that they were entitled to it and they got it.
Just my two cents.
Michael
On 2 Feb 2003, domainwhiz@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sun, 2003-02-02 at 21:26, Roger B.A. Klorese wrote:
> > True. But when a TLD is created for a purpose, that purpose should be
> > excluded from .ORG. Hence, .NAME removes the need to put personal
> > domains in .ORG, the existence of .COM means that a business entity
> > should not be able to register in .NET or .ORG just because its .COM
> > peer was taken, etc.
>
> Entitled to your opinion, Roger, but fortunately yours is a vast
> minority view. Regulation should not exist for regulations sake. I'm
> with Ross on this one, under regulate.
>
> I'd prefer if all TLDs were open, and that consumers made the choice
> what namespace they wanted to be under. I see no compelling reason for
> TLDs to have enforced charters.
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Tue Oct 19 2004 - 23:37:37 EDT