Hello,I would like to allow only a few more top-level
domains.
I think a good sampling of the different types of sites should be taken
(by typing in various Class C IP addresses, for instance) to see how many percent
fall into a specific category before a new TLD is instituted for each of those categories.
I
think the top three largest sub-categories of '.com' (who as yet do not have a (sometimes
more fitting) TLD of their own should be assigned one to remove the overwhelming
burden from the '.com' category.
There is no reason to go too fast on this thing
and create too many TLDs, because it would seem to cause a lot of confusion with
the public who may not always know what the correct TLD is. A situation could
arise where a person seeking a site would have to type in numerous TLDs in order
to find the site he's looking for.
-----
As a side issue, I agree with the proposal
of a TLD for sex-oriented sites. Either '.sex' or '.xxx' is fine with me.
This
is a very needed thing because of the fact that filtering software is sometimes very
inadequate in doing the job.
If a TLD was instituted for sex-oriented sites, it
would greatly help the efforts of parents to keep their children away from such sites.
In fact, filtering software and filtering ISPs could be made obsolete, as the browser
would be able to handle the whole job with a simple password. There is simply
no more practical way than this to solve this problem. It's an even better
and more practical solution than forcing parents to have to supervise every minute
of their kids online time, or forcing the sex-oriented sites to go through extra
hoops to verify who gets onto their sites.
I would not expect much of a challenge
from sex-oriented sites who should be required to conform to this new standard, because
there are no first-amendment issues involved in changing a TLD. Rather, it
is to their advantage because it opens up a lot more names to them.
I would kindly
ask that a proposal be made which would require sex-oriented sites to change their
TLDs to the new one free-of-charge and give them up to a year to do so.
I think
this is very reasonable.
If anyone disagrees, I would kindly ask them to put some
thought into it and explain why rather than just saying "I disagree".
Thank you
all for your time,
Steven D. Sybesma
Englewood, CO USA
webmaster@itoldyouso.org