Dot-org Domains Safe For Now

dan g writes: "Whew! I sure am glad about this. No one will be taking my domain away (at least for a little while)." The upshot is that dot-orgs won't have to face any kind of non-profit litmus test.

But what about .com?

[polymath69]

There will be no - I repeat, no - evictions from .org for failure to meet some criteria

But didn't the original scary announcement also say that they wished to re-restrict .com domains to truly commercial websites? Do I [evilpettingzoo.com] still have to worry?

Re:But what about .com?

[agentZ]

So become a business! Put an ad on your page that says, "If you send $1,000,000(US) to my address, I will send you a drawing of a stick figure on a piece of paper." Ta da! You're now selling something. I mean, it never said you had to be a successful business, right?

Re:But what about .com?

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

If it had to be a successful business, over 90% of the .com's wouldn't qualify.

Growing pains or death knell?

[SnakeStu]

So are the hassles and confusion surrounding new TLDs and potential (re-)restriction of old TLDs just growing pains of the Internet and, more specifically, the domain name concept? Or are they a death knell as the domain name concept crumbles under the weight of commercialization?

In the former case, we can either hang on for the ride or seek a way to "profit" (not necessarily monetarily) by finding innovative ways to smooth the path. In the latter case, the only way to survive gracefully, and maybe even "profit" (again, not necessarily in terms of money), is to look beyond domain names and prepare for, and possibly even drive, changes toward a more maintainable solution in which there is little or no incentive, commercial or otherwise, to "grab as much as you can get" (which is a frailty of the current system).

Of course, the future method I'm thinking of is Internet Keywords... ha! just kidding.

My point (and I think there is one amongst this prattling) is that TLD concerns should be a timely reminder that we can choose between the easier, but not necessarily safer, reactive stance or a bolder, more difficult proactive position -- and that only the latter will provide any sort of pay off, cash or otherwise.