Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	Josh Kyle
Date/Time:	Tue, October 24, 2000 at 6:57 PM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.0 using Windows 98
Score:	5
Subject:	Different policies for ".biz" portion
Message:
I believe that the ICANN application specified that one proposal might apply for several strings but only if the policies for all of the strings were uniform. I think that the sub-string addressing put forward for the “.biz” portion of the application (i.e. “storename@diamonds.biz” for a diamond store) is sufficiently different that it should  constitute a different proposal. Therefore either the “.biz” portion of the application should be withdrawn or alternatively the other strings should be withdrawn in order that this be considered one application. Josh Kyle Affinity .biz Team

Message Thread:

• .biz, etc. Application by Abacus America, Inc. — Moderator, October 7 @ 10:37 PM (50/100)
• Whatever happenned to the dot shops — chrisn, December 16 @ 1:22 PM (0/0)
• ABACUS - Great Concept — ak, November 6 @ 12:26 AM (0/0)
• USA families — mikes, November 6 @ 12:00 AM (0/0)
• yes to FAM — henry, November 5 @ 11:52 PM (0/0)
• .fam — andyG, November 5 @ 11:44 PM (0/0)
• Out of 200 proposed TLDs only one is COOL — kevinY , November 5 @ 11:29 PM (0/0)
• .cool — kevinY , November 5 @ 11:20 PM (0/0)
• Family — JamesZ , November 5 @ 11:14 PM (0/0)
• I  Agree  (.FAM and .XXX) — tw, November 5 @ 10:36 PM (0/0)
• Families need .FAM — sl, November 5 @ 10:22 PM (0/0)
• support  for  .COOL — tn, November 5 @ 9:29 PM (1/1)
• Too limited — PHXbird, November 5 @ 10:00 PM (0/0)
• .COOL great idea — AFree , November 5 @ 9:21 PM (1/1)
• Not international enough — PHXbird, November 5 @ 9:58 PM (0/0)
• This is the only application that can reach profitability within the first month - HOW? — griffiths, November 5 @ 6:07 PM (0/0)
• IOD issue — useyourhead, November 5 @ 6:47 AM (0/0)
• .cool will just be a fad — YankeeFan, November 3 @ 3:31 AM (2/2)
• just a fad ? — tn, November 5 @ 10:02 PM (0/0)
• Faddish names — twosheds, November 3 @ 5:14 PM (0/0)
• .XXX a poor idea — ipguy, November 3 @ 12:10 AM (0/0)
• Does Pedro work for Abacus? — YankeeFan, November 1 @ 8:03 AM (3/8)
• No pressing need for .FAM ??? — JohnD, November 2 @ 10:06 PM (0/0)
• Sorry but you are not  fully correct — nickl, November 2 @ 7:12 PM (0/0)
• Does it matter — pedro, November 1 @ 8:14 PM (1/5)
• Ready to go — cambler, November 2 @ 2:18 AM (1/4)
• A few words — useyourhead, November 3 @ 11:27 PM (1/3)
• Registry for Review — cambler, November 4 @ 3:08 AM (1/2)
• There is nothing there — useyourhead, November 5 @ 6:27 AM (1/1)
• will review — useyourhead, November 5 @ 6:29 AM (0/0)
• Abacus got it right — pedro, November 1 @ 4:26 AM (0/0)
• Yes to .FAM — AndrewK , October 31 @ 9:42 PM (0/0)
• Why Abacus for .biz — ChrisK , October 31 @ 9:00 PM (0/0)
• About dot .biz and .inc — dimitrov@mailcity.com, October 31 @ 7:44 AM (0/0)
• MSNBC.com Pole — domainking, October 31 @ 12:38 AM (0/0)
• .COOL — domainking, October 30 @ 11:50 PM (0/0)
• Trying to be cool — nickl, October 27 @ 10:01 PM (0/0)
• cool — jamesh, October 27 @ 7:31 PM (1/1)
• .FAM is the way to go — domainking, October 27 @ 9:57 PM (0/0)
• .fam — mikeS, October 27 @ 1:06 AM (0/0)
• It is very important for ICANN to be fair to the public — alexj, October 26 @ 8:04 PM (0/0)
• To: saynotoabacus — useyourhead, October 26 @ 5:44 AM (0/0)
• EXPERIENCE WITH ABACUS, INC. — vldiaz, October 26 @ 3:07 AM (0/0)
• Abacus App — peniel, October 25 @ 10:54 PM (0/0)
• I like .cool — ChrisK , October 25 @ 8:10 PM (0/0)
• Different policies for ".biz" portion — Josh Kyle, October 24 @ 6:57 PM (1/1)
• ICANN decides not a competitor — Formal Response, October 25 @ 1:03 AM (0/0)
• Anyone know who else has it ready to go? — useyourhead, October 23 @ 5:58 AM (1/9)
• IOD has been online for over 4 years — cambler, October 23 @ 6:51 AM (3/8)
• Image Online Design — Wisdom21, October 31 @ 1:29 AM (0/0)
• The technology by Abacus — Formal Response, October 25 @ 1:28 AM (0/0)
• registry since 1996? — anonymous, October 24 @ 6:31 AM (2/5)
• Refer to the updates ICANN just posted on their web site — wiredz, October 25 @ 10:56 AM (1/1)
• This shows that IOD can't use .web as a trademark but does not deny IOD's rights on .web . — fabrcop, October 25 @ 3:51 PM (0/0)
• Our support — cambler, October 24 @ 7:50 AM (1/2)
• Mr Ambler used the word 'advised' — wiredz, October 25 @ 12:17 AM (1/1)
• Response — cambler, October 25 @ 7:45 PM (0/0)
• .xxx — MikeS, October 22 @ 10:31 PM (2/2)
• .Sex TLD — Satori, October 25 @ 8:46 PM (0/0)
• a voluntary association: ".kids" is ok, but a mandatory ".xxx" is not. — markusbaccus, October 24 @ 7:46 PM (0/0)
• Young people — nickl, October 22 @ 1:19 AM (0/0)
• I agree with jandl — bizEXISTSalready, October 22 @ 1:05 AM (0/0)
• BID SYSTEM UNFAIR to UNRICH — stokdoctor, October 21 @ 10:32 PM (2/2)
• This is negotiable — Formal Response, October 25 @ 1:45 AM (0/0)
• I disagree — pedro, October 23 @ 4:49 AM (0/0)
• Sorry for the excessive use of exclamation marks.  My only intent was to draw your attention to — SayNoToAbacus, October 21 @ 12:11 AM (1/1)
• Strong words — PHXbird, October 21 @ 10:08 PM (0/0)
• WWW.NAMES4EVER.COM — Domainking, October 20 @ 7:35 PM (2/2)
• I like Names4ever.com — Monya, October 24 @ 3:52 PM (0/0)
• Names4ever are excellent. They are one of the BEST — fabiolg, October 24 @ 3:22 PM (0/0)
• To saynotoabacus — use your head, October 20 @ 6:11 AM (0/0)
• .biz — A. Kinney, October 19 @ 4:48 PM (1/1)
• bz cannot be the business domain — b. adams, October 23 @ 11:58 PM (0/0)
• Comments — sjk, October 19 @ 7:26 AM (0/0)
• Way to go Abacus! — use your head, October 19 @ 6:19 AM (1/4)
• Sounds like you work for Abacus (or were paid to send that message)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — SayNoToAbacus, October 20 @ 12:10 AM (3/3)
• where did all the good names go? — anonymous, October 24 @ 5:41 AM (0/0)
• Abacus offers superior one on one customer service. — stevexplor, October 20 @ 6:22 AM (0/0)
• Hey, enought with the !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — For The People, October 20 @ 12:28 AM (0/0)
• Proposition to ICANN, Applicants & Internet Community — Pistoff, October 18 @ 5:45 PM (0/0)
• Abacus is trying to BUY your support!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! — SayNoToAbacus, October 17 @ 9:22 AM (1/1)
• Abacus buying support? — PHXbird, October 17 @ 11:34 PM (0/0)
• We want to see your application — emc2, October 17 @ 3:16 AM (0/0)
• .fam is needed — dconder, October 16 @ 9:11 PM (1/10)
• .fam provided by .xxx -- Bad Idea. — bennionjd, October 16 @ 10:52 PM (4/9)
• .fam and .xxx — Conway, October 24 @ 2:26 AM (0/0)
• FAM is needed, but requests high responsability — Schultz-FAMtld, October 20 @ 8:17 AM (2/2)
• Abacus is fit to operate .fam — pedro, October 23 @ 5:25 AM (0/0)
• Sorry - Misspelling "Our Website" — Schultz-FAMtld, October 20 @ 8:25 AM (0/0)
• your logic is flawed — dconder, October 19 @ 12:33 AM (0/0)
• Bad idea is posting opinion without reading the application — pedro, October 17 @ 2:04 AM (1/3)
• I've done my reading — bennionjd, October 20 @ 5:43 AM (1/2)
• There are no other applicants — dconder, October 23 @ 6:00 PM (1/1)
• Not a now-or-never. — bennionjd, October 24 @ 4:57 AM (0/0)
• Simply unworkable — jandl, October 16 @ 12:41 AM (0/0)
• .BIZ applications — korskarn, October 15 @ 4:43 PM (2/4)
• missing the point — jandl, October 16 @ 12:13 AM (1/2)
• i did not know that — b. adams, October 24 @ 12:10 AM (1/1)
• re: I did not know that — jandl, October 29 @ 8:15 PM (0/0)
• Strongly disagree — pedro, October 15 @ 5:50 PM (0/0)
• Where is your application? — jandl, October 14 @ 7:55 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy