[Lnc-business] .libertarian domain name

Tue Apr 21 14:50:24 EDT 2015

Sam, feel free to pass this on.  I was originally going to include a bunch
of links to various articles, but that would have been a bit too
time-consuming.  (I do actually have to perform work for my company once in
a while.)  But anyone can Google it like I did if they need the details.

Dan

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Sam Goldstein <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Daniel,
>
> Thanks for the research.  Do you mind if I pass this on to the tech people
> in the LPIN?
>
> Sam
>
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> I just spent a few minutes doing research on generic top level domains
>> (gTLDs) and the variants being offered.  And I ran into a whole bunch of
>> controversy and warnings and caveats, including such concerns as to whether
>> existing browsers and search engines will be able to recognize the more
>> exotic domains.  More importantly, ICANN must approve all new top level
>> domains, which it is doing slowly and at considerable expense, for a very
>> limited selection of new names.  (One article said that the registration
>> fee was $185,000 plus another $25,000 per year to maintain it.)
>>
>> I'm not at all convinced that paying $1,000 to some company like "
>> tld.name" (the link Sam sent below) will actually buy us a top level
>> domain.  Even if this company (or a some other such registrar) is not an
>> outright scam, the most it is likely to do is submit a request to ICANN.
>> That doesn't guarantee anything.  All they are trying to do is panic us
>> (and other companies and organizations) into rushing to apply before anyone
>> else tries to grab a particular name or word, so that we have first dibs in
>> case it is ever approved.
>>
>> Whenever I'm confronted with a sales pitch which is the equivalent of
>> "only the first ten callers will get this special deal" or "this offer will
>> expire in the next ten minutes" my instinctive reaction is to ignore it.  I
>> think we're best off ignoring this incredible deal, and using the $1,000
>> for more important purposes.
>>
>> Dan Wiener
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 4:38 AM, Sam Goldstein <
>> goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> http://tld.name/register-your-tld.php
>>>
>>> Stewart,
>>>
>>> This is the link Karl sent me.
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>
>>> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:32 PM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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)
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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)
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20150421/c1d7ed73/attachment-0002.html>