question Should I bother with domain hack versions of my .com domains?

[notabot]

So I have a number of domains which will be the core of some sites I am developing, namely (assume the .com for all) - topicwise, townwise, profilewise, bleepwise, pagewise, searchwise. I also have the "domain hack" versions of these, i.e. topicwi.se, townwi.se etc. I got these initially because I thought it might be nice to have a slightly shorter version of the name that would save a few characters in links.

What I'm wondering is, what do you think of those .se domains? Is it worth keeping this sort of "domain hack" version of your .com (assuming you're running a real website, as I am, which people are posting to and about, so there will be links around the web to these sites).

Also, I'm curious how people regard Sweden (.se) in terms of freedom of speech. There's been a lot of cancel culture going around lately, and I'm wondering if I have, say, a website that goes against, let's say, a certain political narrative, how does Sweden usually stand in those situations? In other words, do they tend to "let it be" and resist cancel culture when it happens, or are they quick to take domains away if someone complains? Just curious if anyone here has a handle on that.

So bottom line... is .se worth keeping? Domain hacks in general, if you already have the .com of the name... worthwhile, just for a version of the name that is 3 chars shorter?

Thanks!

 

[lock]

Not unless it was gold to begin with not the examples given. Hard enough to sell dot coms don't challenge yourself as you will give them away to be probably dropped on expiry.

 

[frank-germany]

What I'm wondering is, what do you think of those .se domains? Is it worth keeping this sort of "domain hack" version of your .com

not at all
- not because of hack at least-

 

[Revisiting]

to put it bluntly a Waste of money
Reads like the extreme of registering .net org, and ccld for a com domains

 

[DomainHacks]

Yes if you owned wise.com.

 

[jhm]

Hacks are only worth it if the word itself is strong enough

Sear.ch for example, strong hack. 1 strong word, otherwise the dot com "search wise dot com" is just fine on its own ...the hack of it isn't worth it

 

[DomainRecap]

First off, I HATE the name and "Domain Hack" comes off as sketchy and potentially illegal to many end users. I've mentioned it in conversation and gotten weird looks (+ comments if I was hacking websites) and in my experience, most companies buying domains don't have a clue about the aftermarket to begin with and think you're a scammer or thief, so just try dropping "Domain Hack" on them. CLICK.

Otherwise, I think the vast majority are a waste of money, and that many of the "past sales" are fake and based on other factors (like valuable LL/LLL domains or single-words with a suffix like .ES, .SE, etc.), but I did register one not long ago.

The only reason was that the actual word was restricted for use under .CA, and miraculously the domain + .CA created this word. Plus, it was aged and previously in use, so why not? I'll probably end up renewing it for 20 years without a sale, but I just had to give it a shot. Like I would give Afri.ca a shot if it came up and was cheap enough.

But selling premium .COM domains is tough enough, and stocking up on spurious Domain Spans (I prefer that term) will likely turn into a serious money sink you'll regret.

 

[notabot]

To be clear, I am a developer, not a domain reseller. I am not getting these domains for the purposes of investment or making money down the line by selling them. I was just talking about how useful the domain hack version of my name might be in terms of users and being a little shorter than the .com version, that's all. I'm sorry if I misconstrued the primary purpose of this forum, I thought you all might be especially interested in thinking about names from a purely aesthetic and utilitarian perspective, but it seems that most here only respond assuming that I'm another domain investor. I have no interest in selling domains. I make websites, and I enjoy thinking about the "perfect name" for my projects, and I thought this might be the place to do that. But the only advice I seem to be seeing here is related to selling, and I'm not interested in that at all. I apologise for wasting everybody's time, it was a misunderstanding as to the scope and purpose of this forum. No need to further reply in any case, I have finalized my domain choices (and, fwiw, will not be retaining the .se versions of my domains). Thanks for your time.

 

[wwwulff]

Also, I'm curious how people regard Sweden (.se) in terms of freedom of speech. There's been a lot of cancel culture going around lately, and I'm wondering if I have, say, a website that goes against, let's say, a certain political narrative, how does Sweden usually stand in those situations? In other words, do they tend to "let it be" and resist cancel culture when it happens, or are they quick to take domains away if someone complains? Just curious if anyone here has a handle on that.

Sweden is a democratic society with free speech so it will not give you any problems

 

[likemike]

Good decision notabot not to waste more money. Just buy the best dot com domain name you can afford for your site.

 

[notabot]

Thanks. I'm not so sure Sweden is all about free speech. There is an article which apparently I'm not allowed to post a link to, but easily found by its title - "Sweden's War on Free Speech".

Since I would like people on my platforms to be able to speak freely about whatever they want to talk about, including criticizing religions like Islam, maybe using names based on .se would be opening myself up to being vulnerable to getting banned. I find the whole "hate speech" thing very troublesome, because while it appears on the surface to be based on compassion and inclusion, in the end it seems to result in (ironically) hate and exclusion. There's been a lot of censorship lately that I've been watching, of entire platforms like Gab and Parler. While I don't condone everything that gets posted on such places, at the same time I am of the view that if you're not for speech that you disagree with, then you're not for freedom of speech at all. If only "politically correct" speech is allowed, then that's not freedom of speech. There is a worrying trend toward censorship, seemingly everywhere, and I'm nervous that if I want to develop a platform that allows people to talk freely about their opinions on the issues of the day, then eventually the woke mob will come after me and try to get me shut down. That rankles, so it's another reason why I've been interested in getting "backup" domains. I thought the .se conceit was kind of cute, since it fit into the naming scheme I am using (everything ending in wise). But it looks from the above article that I'm hearing the sorts of noises from Sweden that make me nervous - talk about making the internet a safe place, or hounding people because they stated a negative opinion about Islam.

Sorry, not trying to start any political discussion here. I'm not interested in arguing about the specifics, I guess I'm just riffing at a meta level on something that's been making me rather nervous lately. I've always assumed that freedom of speech is a given in America, but now that seems to be in danger. It's gotten to the point where you can't even criticize certain ideas without being labeled as "hateful" or a "___-phobe". I think open discussion of ideas is important for a free society; it's how we figure out what's good and what isn't, what ideas are worth holding onto, versus what should be discarded. But now we're seeing a speech police mentality whereby nobody is allowed to be offended by anything (except white people, seemingly - nobody gives a toss about offending them). Again, sorry - this is a bit of a bugbear for me right now, like I said the whole online environment is just making me very nervous, as someone who wants to build a platform where anybody can say whatever they like, within the limits of legality (e.g. obviously I would not tolerate stuff like child pornography, human trafficking, actual threats and abuse, etc - there's a whole gray area there that is extremely interesting to me at an intellectual level, in terms of what do you allow, what do you not allow, let's just say I think the line of censorship has been thrown a little too far over to the authoritarian side just lately).

So if anyone knows of the best tlds for what I'm after, maybe that would give me some leads. In other words, "safe" in terms of "they probably won't cancel me just because I have some of my users criticizing some religion or cultural sacred cows, or generally offending the woke crowd in whatever myriad ways they can be offended now". Any tips on good tlds for serving as "backups" should I join the gab, parler etc club, I'd be glad to hear ideas on that.

Thanks.

 

[wwwulff]

Oh, if you want to host a site that allows all sorts of speech including hate speech against Muslims, Jews or others, then I think you'll have problems in most places not only in Sweden

 

[notabot]

Ok, and what qualifies as "hate speech"? That's the problem, it ends up being whatever you want it to be.

See how complex your original remark becomes? "Oh, you don't have to worry, Sweden is all about freedom of speech". Well, yes of course it is, everybody says that - but when push comes to shove, the question is how do they deal with speech that they don't happen to like or agree with? Anything negative can now be labeled as "hate speech", it seems.

Is someone saying "All X should die" hate speech? Yes, of course. But what about the infinite universe of other, more mild criticism which could be leveled at X? Is all of that to be shoved under the same umbrella of "hate speech", just because it's negative or critical? I was brought up to believe that critical thought is healthy. If you see something wrong or out of whack, then you should be able to talk about it. I guess maybe it's because I'm a programmer, I have a brain tuned to seeing what's wrong in a system. I see plenty wrong with how we approach the culture wars currently. Are X perfect in all respect? Hardly, I don't care who we are talking about, nobody is perfect, no culture is perfect. Everybody should be able to talk about this stuff, without it being labeled instantly (and, in my opinion, lazily) as "hate speech". I might disagree with some aspect of what's happening in our culture at the moment. Does that mean I "hate" it? No.

So I look for a place, a refuge where relative sanity still prevails, and people can look at an argument on its objective merits, rather than through a lens of identity politics, intersectionality, critical race theory or whatever other marxist twaddle is currently being peddled as political education today.

If such a place, such a country exists, where I can get a TLD without fear of being randomly canceled by the first woke mob to put me in their crosshairs, then I'd love to hear about it. It would be a nice backup for when they inevitably come for me because I foolishly allowed someone to speak some verboten opinion. No, I'm not going to allow people to come on my sites promoting killing X or Y or Z. I have to think hard and carefully about how and where to draw those lines (e.g. is mockery ok? How about satire? Joking about someone else? Sarcasm? etc). It's a hard thing to consider, but I'm up for the challenge. I just want to give myself a solid foundation on which to build something, and one of those pillars is the domain name and TLD. I'm just practicing basic pro-active self-defense here.

Thanks again.

 

[wwwulff]

I'm from Denmark, but I had a Swedish girlfriend for many years and I can guarantee you that we have one of the world's most extensive forms of freedom of speech - Both societies are built on the Enlightenment ideals which also contained a lot of religious criticism and as you may know, the famous (for some infamous) muslim critical cartons came from Denmark - We have a widespread tradition of critical thinking and speech and both sarcasm and irony are a cornerstone of our approach to the world and I have never heard of a Swedish website taken down due to free speech

 

[notabot]

Well, that's good to know. Thanks very much. However the first article I looked up when I went searching for some information on their approach to this stuff, was the one I referenced earlier - again I can't post the link, but the title is searchable, "Sweden's War on Free Speech". Maybe things are changing, or maybe things aren't quite as open as you think. For my part, I was "liberal" for most of my life, right up until a few years ago when I first started to question many of the things I had implicitly believed my whole life. I had believed, for example, that America was a bastion of free speech. I have since learned that this isn't really the case any more, if it ever was. If you live in a certain bubble, then yes, everything looks good. But it's when you step outside of that bubble when you discover just how things really are. It's not pretty. For example, when I decided to get a gun for self-defense, I assumed that talking about this openly on my site, with a reasoned explanation about why I did it, wouldn't be a problem. But yes it was definitely a problem. There were a number of my users who up to that point had been very friendly, regular sponsors (the site is supported by voluntary donations from its users) and regular contributors. But then after I "came out" as being a gun owner, these people stopped contributing, stopped donating, and became much colder in their interactions when they did post on my forums. I quickly discovered that I had stepped outside of their bubble, and it was my first personal experience of cancel culture. It was not pleasant, and made me question what I had thought were friendships built up over years online with people using my website. If they could abandon me so instantly over something like this, were they ever really my friends? Obviously not. And the path has continued ever since, with other discussions that came up - e.g. when a black woman came onto my forum claiming to be "the first black woman to cycle across America unsupported" (my main site is all about bicycle touring), I got into a discussion with her when she said that the reason why there aren't more black people on bicycles was due to "white oppression". I thought I could have a civil conversation about that, boy was I wrong! It resulted in a whole bunch of people leaving my site, calling me all manner of bad names. Not only that, but a bunch of them (or maybe others) called my advertisers (at the time I still had ads on the site, my own network, not google) telling them I was a great big, well you know the word, I don't know if that's a bad word here but you get the idea. I lost all of my advertisers, all because I dared to challenge this black woman on her narrative about white oppression. It was another eye opener for me. I am not ... that word... in the slightest, but I've since learned that according to critical race theory, yes I am. It's a whole mess, sorry to go on, but I guess it illuminates where I'm coming from here. This is not theory for me; I've already been burned by it, in some small fashion. So it looms large in my fears as I think about expanding my sites into other topics outside of bicycle touring. I thought it would be a simple matter, but now I fear that if I allow speech that is not "approved" by a certain set of the population, no matter how mild (as my criticism was - mild, and very civil) - I will be canceled by the mob. It's a sobering thought as a software/website developer with big dreams. I don't want to muzzle myself, or my users, unless they are actually saying bad things like all X must die or push Israel into the sea or whatever.

So I'm still left wondering how Sweden and other Euro countries would treat me and my site (or at least my domain, it would not be hosted there physically) if I don't toe the political line. Things have gotten pretty crazy here, pretty crazy everywhere really. It's something to think about.

 

[wwwulff]

I will post the link for you: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12078/sweden-free-speech

One of those who according to the article got into trouble posted this:

"A biological sensation in Sweden. A new bird species (parasitus muslimus) has established itself here... In recent years, the Arab bird (parasitus muslimus) has been widely spread in northern Europe, largely because it lacks natural enemies here...The female has a comprehensive feather shield, where only the eyes are visible... The male usually has four females... The species is a migratory bird but with the weird feature that they never move back..."

If this is the kind of free speech you will promote, when either Sweden or other west European countries are the right place for you - You can try in Eastern Europe or in Russia there I think they are more tolerant with that kind of speech

 

[notabot]

I don't condone or condemn those opinions, but I think people should be allowed to express such opinions, yes.

If that passage was in regard to, say, neo-nazis, would it be ok then? What about if it was referring to white people?

Tolerance is seemingly a partisan thing these days. For example, President Trump was banned from Twitter, while the Taliban, who openly execute women in the market square and throw gays off rooftops, are still on Twitter and allowed to post.

I honestly don't see what's so bad about the passage you posted. The person obviously has a problem with the Moslems who have been pouring into Europe in recent years. If you were to be honest, a lot of people might have similar problems with a largely incompatible culture that doesn't want to assimilate and brings many issues (gang rape, oppression of women, barbaric practices related to "honor killings", beheadings, intolerance of humor or criticism of their prophet to the point of openly declaring fatwahs against those who offend and killing them, etc). The concern is that these people are invading your country, as "political migrants" fleeing from oppression in their own country, but then never going back, and yet at the same time never assimilating with the local culture. Now you have no-go areas in your own countries, where women may not venture without appropriate covering for fear of being harrassed or even gang raped.

Yes, who might have a problem with all that? And why should they be allowed to express it? The horror! No, we must be so tolerant that we tolerate those who want to see us dead, or at least subjugated as infidels.

You have nicely demonstrated why the liberal concept of "free speech" is so disingenuous. You really seem to think that your country has "freedom of speech", and yet in the same breath you will advocate certain speech as being unacceptable and worthy of being banned. And if I disagree, well then I guess that makes me a bad person who shouldn't think about doing anything in Europe. See how this went? Very quickly it was exposed just how egalitarian and open you are to other opinions. You may call it "hate speech", others simply say that they are looking at what's happening in the world without rose tinted spectacles, and they are calling it like it is, rather than trying to pretend that everybody is nice and well-intentioned. I don't claim that all Muslims are bad, or that all people who criticize Islam are good; but I do at least acknowledge that there is a friction there, that is only growing and getting more pent-up, the more it is censored. When you put a lid on this sort of thing, that's what makes the eventual explosion all the more extreme and horrible. If we let people talk, let them speak, let them trade ideas and tell each other why the other's ideas are wrong (or right), as long as we're not openly advocating for killing or harming others, I don't see why talking sarcastically (or whatever) about other cultures who are seen by some to be invading your country, why this is so bad. Trying to pretend that it doesn't exist, or that anyone who expresses these views is a nazi and should be expelled, is just unrealistic and ignoring reality. Trust me, there are millions of normal, non-extremist people living in Europe and the USA and everywhere, who are starting to question what is happening, everything that is happening, what is being imposed on them without asking for their consent, and what is being done to those who they see speaking out about it. People are watching, and ironically the censorship is only going to cause more extremism, not less.

My point is not easily swallowed, because it entails tolerating speech that you obviously regard as intolerable. But that's the whole point of free speech; if you only tolerate speech that you are ok with, then that's not free speech that you're in favor of. That's totalitarianism.

 

[notabot]

If this is the kind of free speech you will promote, when either Sweden or other west European countries are the right place for you - You can try in Eastern Europe or in Russia there I think they are more tolerant with that kind of speech

Sorry, your sentence here was hard to parse but I just went on the assumption that you meant "If this is the kind of free speech you will promote, then neither Sweden or other west European countries are the right place for you - You can try in Eastern Europe or in Russia there I think they are more tolerant with that kind of speech". That interpretation is what I took from the final sentence. If I was mistaken then please accept my apologies in advance.

 

[wwwulff]

You obviously have no idea what is going on in Europe - There is a lot of criticism of everything possible also related to Muslims and you are free to express your opinion but if you start comparing people you are critical of as parasites, then you are completely in line with the Nazis' view of Jews as rats and parasites - To be honest, you are welcome to support that kind of speech for me, but we will never agree and in Denmark where I live, no one would punish you for those kinds of views, but most will consider you a simi racist nazi idiot, like most here viewed Trump.

I`m done here.

 

[notabot]

Ok, thanks for your input. I hope I didn't offend too badly, my point was more intended to be meta rather than getting into the weeds of specifics like Trump or Islam. But they are useful examples, that's all. Being called a "racist nazi idiot", fwiw, will just push reasonable people who are expressing reasonable doubts about what is going on, further into being actual racists and extremists. If you push people for their views, they don't change their views - they just get more entrenched, and more extreme. It's like Zen - you push, the universe pushes back. So do people. So while you might try to pretend that you're being "tolerant" (which makes you feel good, I'm sure), calling someone an "idiot racist nazi" in the same breath is anything but tolerant. I said I didn't necessarily condone or agree with the views expressed by these people; I can, however, try to understand them, and I think I do, with clear and open eyes, and I think that allowing their views to be expressed openly will only help to achieve common understanding. Open speech can be debated, can be challenged, and discussion allows us to chew over ideas, and see what is worth keeping, and what should be discarded. If we do it honestly and openly, then it's a healthy process. The opposing view, that certain speech is "hateful" and must therefore be censored, is on the rise, and that was the genesis of my question about which country TLDs might be "safe" for a website that permits such "despicable" viewpoints to be expressed, without the entire thing being taken down as a bunch of "idiot racist nazis". That's all. I think open speech might act as a pressure release. It might actually help people work through their anger, frustration, whatever is causing their intolerance of the "other". If we simply condemn such people with terms like idiot, racist, nazi, then that's not a discussion, that's just one step away from saying "they should be banned", because, well, duh, of course, why should we tolerate racist idiot nazis? It's one step on the path to being banned. Name calling is never productive, it is more of the playground level of invective than civilized discourse. And we are at that inflection point here now, at least in the USA. Sites like Gab and Parler were taken offline due to posts from certain users. So it's a valid concern, and why I brought up the question of which TLDs might be more open to websites that allow (not condone, allow) speech that some might consider objectionable.

 

[wwwulff]

I have no intention of calling you either one or the other thing, what I said was that most people would consider you that way if you allow people to post that kind of bullshit speech as the woman did in the article - The big test for your tolerance is whether you can tolerate being called that kind of thing in the same way you obviously tolerate that woman's statement about Muslims as parasites

 

[notabot]

Why not just come out and admit that these are your opinions? At least man up and own it. I admit that I support Trump, and you make your bias obvious when you refer to the quote as "that kind of bullshit speech". Why do you try to fluff the pillow to make it seem like you're not the one who is calling me an "idiot nazi racist"? Those were your words, after all. They came from your mind, and you typed them. I think to try to dissemble by ascribing such insults to "most other people" is just rather disingenous, not to say cowardly. Own it! Be a man. It's ok to find other people's opinions reprehensible. If you want to call me a racist nazi idiot, then just do it, don't hide behind "what most other people will probably think". It's ok, I'm used to it, I won't bite your head off. Jeez.

For my part I respect your right to have such opinions, and I won't call you nasty names in return. I hear where you're coming from, and it's ok to live in that bubble. You're a nice person, there are racist nazi idiots in the world, many of them Trump supporters, and Muslims are poor innocent migrants who don't deserve to be called parasites. It's cultural enrichment! The beheadings are the work of deranged individuals, and not any indication of problems with the culture as a whole. The no-go zones are a myth, and Muslims have nothing but positive intentions for their new home countries. They enjoy blending into the local culture and learning the language of their new home country. They are doctors, physicists, accountants, many professionals and valuable members of society, and most of these migrants aren't young men of military age, but rather women and children. They bring a unique and distinct new flavor to the melting pot. Everything's fine! Just ignore the fires, the rapes, the weird tendency for people to avoid criticizing Islam out loud. All of that is racist propaganda put out by extremists who probably have little Hitler shrines in their bedroom and read Mein Kampf before going to sleep at night. They are all extreme right wing skinheads and can safely be ignored.

On behalf of all right wing extremist skinheads, I apologise for my gauche intrusion into your civilized discourse, I will go now to polish my doc martens and bid you adieu, arrivederchi, farewell.

 

[Alop]

I can’t say I hate free dot ly …but when it’s 2 words than it’s more of a no for me

 

[notabot]

Thanks for your input. I've already decided to let go of the .se versions of my domains. Saving three characters... meh, I guess if I want a URL shortener then why not really go for it and do it properly - get a really short name. Anyway it's hard to "say" something like topicwi.se - you have to kind of describe it when you say it - "The website is topicwi dot se - yeah there's no dot com on the end, it's just dot 'se'...". This never goes well. I'm going to let go of the .se domain hack versions, and like I said, if I need a URL shortener, then I'll just find one that is easy to remember and easy to say, and a lot shorter.

Thanks again.

 

[The Durfer]

yes, it would mean more traffic anyway. eg., softuse.com and softu.se

then, you would just forward the traffic to your main site.