[Lnc-business] .libertarian domain name

[Daniel Wiener]

Years ago I bought the domain name "LibertarianParty.info", mostly to keep
it out of any hostile hands, and I still maintain ownership of it.  I made
some use of it back when I was Secretary of the Libertarian Party of
California, but it mostly remains fallow.  I didn't pay anything extra for
it, either when I first got it or with my annual renewals, so that small
cost seemed worth it.  And ".info" is at least a tier-2 domain, not as
valuable as ".com" or ".org" but better than a lot of the crap that's now
available.

I'm not convinced that it's worth $1,000 to get "Libertarian" as a
top-level domain.  Is anyone really going to bother with such a long
extension, when short familiar ones like ".com" and ".org" are the
standard?  Nobody will accidentally go to a web page that ends in
".libertarian", so the risk of confusion or deception seems minimal.  It
might tickle our own egos, but that's about it.  If we had lots of spare
money I'd be tempted, but our financial situation is not good and there are
many higher priorities.

Sorry to be such a kill-joy.

Dan Wiener


On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Sam Goldstein <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
wrote:

> A couple members on the LPIN Leadership page just brought this to my
> attention:
>
> Hey, the internet top level domain libertarian is available. This costs
> $1,000 and would allow us to have that in lieu of .com or .org etc... we
> would be able to seel the rights to use it for someguy(dot)libertarian
> etc... The democrats and republicans have .democrat and . republican I
> worry if we don't then someone else will and we will have no control over
> it.
>
>
>
> I suggest that we jump on this as soon as possible. Either out of the IT
> Committee budget or some other account.
>
> Sam
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>


-- 
*"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we
guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we
compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if
this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare
the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or
experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it
disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key
to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it
doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is.
If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”*
-- Richard Feynman (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20150420/655410d2/attachment-0002.html>