- Impact
- 3,245
personally I like it better than .com and it actually makes more sense. I'm sure there's a simple explanation for it...anyone know the answer?
Thanks Bob....sleep much ....you're probably a lot like me, if I get 5 hours of sleep, and I fall asleep about 10:00pm eastern time, i'm good to go at 3:00am.I believe this is the I did not read all 260 pages, the actual list is in Part 3. ICANN have this report linked from their site. I am sure someone has tried to game the system to get a country code and I expect the UN and ICANN effectively resist it, as they should.
Bob
You're not seriously remotely considering the "new country" thing for a TLD, are you? Managing to create a new country is a highly complicated and difficult task these days. Having the "international community" recognize it, even harder.
One question may be worthy to ask (I didn't look the answer): Would it be possible to have a ccTLD change in case of a major name change? If that would be possible, convincing a small island country to change it's name to get an easy source of revenue in the form of a nicely sellable ccTLD may be achievable. Note: It seems to me ccTLD aren't necessarily attributed according to the first two characters of a name (but if that possible, it's what is done!? You would have to be pretty sure of what you'll end up with according to what name).
Humm, the country and its people would also benefit from it if there is a fair deal in place. The country could even sell the domains itself (public registrar). So, I don't think it's "unethical". Or it may be in the sense of solely changing your name for that purpose. But on a different level than what I understand you implied. I guess in today's world of competition, it would be kind of OK. The first would have the advantage of the "first mover advantage": Maybe the others simply haven't thought of doing this. After, rules may be changed to forbid every small country to do the same (assuming it's currently possible to have its ccTLD changed, which I don't know).
I'm not sure about the "legal costs". A country can probably decide quite unilaterally to change its name. I'm unsure of the indirect costs, but it may not be that much in the end.
Sure, I get that the country creation was merely "hypothetical", but the name change route, if possible, could be a serious thing to consider for a small island nation.
FYI, have a look at this: https://www.gov.uk/government/publi.../country-name-changes-in-hmg-use-1919-to-2020 .
(Myanmar, which was formerly called Burma, indeed has now a .mm domain. The change occurred in 89, so it was a bit early. They may never have got a ccTLD for "Burma" before being attributed the .mm)
It's basically rebranding and it's done all the time. My area of the world has been rebranding from "Hampton Roads" to "757". As the old saying goes, you have to spend money to make money, and i just spent $8 registering the domain KingofGo.com because as King, i declare we rebrand our country to be simply;Humm, the country and its people would also benefit from it if there is a fair deal in place. The country could even sell the domains itself (public registrar). So, I don't think it's "unethical". Or it may be in the sense of solely changing your name for that purpose. But on a different level than what I understand you implied. I guess in today's world of competition, it would be kind of OK. The first would have the advantage of the "first mover advantage": Maybe the others simply haven't thought of doing this. After, rules may be changed to forbid every small country to do the same (assuming it's currently possible to have its ccTLD changed, which I don't know).
I'm not sure about the "legal costs". A country can probably decide quite unilaterally to change its name. I'm unsure of the indirect costs, but it may not be that much in the end.
Sure, I get that the country creation was merely "hypothetical", but the name change route, if possible, could be a serious thing to consider for a small island nation.
FYI, have a look at this:
(Myanmar, which was formerly called Burma, indeed has now a .mm domain. The change occurred in 89, so it was a bit early. They may never have got a ccTLD for "Burma" before being attributed the .mm)
Sure. I don't know if you're only talking of the ccTLD or of everything. But even with the latter, for a small island nation, the "cost" doesn't seem very high. As for the ccTLD, if it isn't currently much used (all the more reasons to want to change it!), the cost isn't very high either.Just my opinion, but everything worldwide with the old country name needs to be changed.
Sure. I don't know if you're only talking of the ccTLD or of everything. But even with the latter, for a small island nation, the "cost" doesn't seem very high. As for the ccTLD, if it isn't currently much used (all the more reasons to want to change it!), the cost isn't very high either.
Just imagine, something like the Pitcairn where they are like 50 people, putting their hands on the .go and setting up a public registrar. It would just be the jackpot for them. Nauru would be an extremely good candidate also. I'm pretty sure the 10K inhabitants can live a good life being entirely supported by the move.
To give a $1000 monthly allowance to everybody, you need $120 mil per year, that's 6 million domains at a margin of $20 per domain per year. 6 millions .go seem achievable. Double that and everybody receives $2000 every month. Free money. You would just have to change your country's name. Is "Nauru" that great you would want to keep it? (again, assuming you can change your ccTLD, which I'm not sure about)
I am shocked by this....Is there not a .GO? For real???To prevent some political conflicts:
BidenMust.GO
KamalaMust.GO
TrumpMust.GO