::: WHICH new TLDs did you suggest and WHICH old TLD should be wiped out and WHY :::

[gaetanomarano]

.

::: WHICH new TLDs did you suggest and WHICH old TLD should be wiped out and WHY :::

in my opinion...

new TLDs to introduce: .WORLD (as global TLD) .SPACE (a TLD for our future in Space)

old/useless TLD to wipe out (and redirect) or never release: .COOP .INFO .JOBS .INT .MUSEUM .NAME .PRO .TRAVEL

modified and redirected: ALL double-dot TLDs like (e.g.) .co.uk all changed and redirected to .UK

.

 

[Gerry]

http://www.dnforum.com/f31/why-not-space-moon-mars-tlds-now-thread-391445.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f557/possible-gtlds-cut-thread-401651.html
http://www.dnforum.com/f557/why-save-yu-tld-thread-414511.html

Why are you wanting answers to the same questions already answered/discussed in your previous threads?

 

[gaetanomarano]

Why are you wanting answers to the same questions already answered/discussed in your previous threads?

1. because all these threads have been closed after a few posts

2. because I think the too many TLDs proliferation is a big mistake

3. because I think that many TLDs should be replaced with .WORLD

.

 

[tekz999]

.biz? win.
.us? win.

 

[ukbackorderukbackorder is verified member.]

Why replace useless extensions with more useless extensions? I would rather there were NO more.

 

[Theo]

Welcome to 2010 - new TLDs are going to be introduced vs. removing old ones. Unless a TLD represents an obsolete organization, there is no way to even argue over this.
Although TBO, I don't see .tel holding out much longer

 

[gaetanomarano]

Why replace useless extensions with more useless extensions? I would rather there were NO more.

my suggestion is to use just ONE extension for all TLDs (excluding the too popular TLDs and ccTLDs like .com .us .eu .net .org .de etc.) with .WORLD (or the shorter .W)

 

[grcorp]

my suggestion is to use just ONE extension for all TLDs (excluding the too popular TLDs and ccTLDs like .com .us .eu .net .org .de etc.) with .WORLD (or the shorter .W)

Wasn't that the idea behind .com when it started 25 years ago?

If it were to be adopted in the same manner, the same thing would happen all over again; all the good .world names would get taken, and there would be no alternative, seeing as how in this scenario, no new TLD's would be made.

We're on the same page in most respects here... I disagree with the vast majority of new TLD's, but as soon as one name is registered and used under that TLD, and businesses become dependent on it (i.e. backlinks to the domain, domain printed on business cards, email addresses at that domain, etc.), it would be extremely difficult to abolish.

 

[Theo]

.com was originally slated to be .cor for corporation but was changed.

 

[katherine]

After .com, .co & .cm I feel that .con will make a killing among domain investors

 

[Theo]

I'll sign up for lexi.con

 

[David G]

IMO, by far the best new gtld would be .web

 

[grcorp]

After .com, .co & .cm I feel that .con will make a killing among domain investors

As my father, a consultant says - "We put the CON in consulting."

 

[gaetanomarano]

IMO, by far the best new gtld would be .web

or .www to have easy to remember domains like www.www.www

 

[urlurl]

i dont think they should come out with anymore generic extensions. most people i talk to know of .com, .net and some .org - beyound that the general population has very little knowledge of all the other extensions out there.

Country code extensions make sense (.ca, .eu, .cn, etc.)
industry exclusive type extensions may (potentialy) have their place (.museum, .pro, etc)
There are enough generic extensions to go around and most aren't being utilized to their full extent as it is - why make more other than to line the pockets of the registrars.

 

[gaetanomarano]

.

why don't (simply) allow all web servers to recognize domains like .domainname. without add any new TLD ?

.