Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	alireza
Date/Time:	Fri, November 3, 2000 at 9:04 PM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.01 using Windows NT 5.0
Score:	5
Subject:	.nom
Message:
I think .NOM can be a great new TLD.  It is a natural extension of day to day conversation.  Among the applicants, their qualifications, and what they can offer, I like .tv the best.  It is a relative new comer offering a $3.50 price (versus $6.00 by NSI).  I also like them because of what they have done with .tv, and their ability to create a REAL GLOBAL CONSORTIUM (with .NOM). As a current .tv customer, I can testify to their abilities

Message Thread:

• .nom Application by the dotNOM Consortium — Moderator, October 7 @ 10:11 PM (32/69)
• End price — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:04 AM (1/8)
• ENd Price — J.Green, November 6 @ 12:08 AM (1/7)
• Thanks John — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:14 AM (1/6)
• on the $3.50 — J.Green, November 6 @ 12:18 AM (1/5)
• DNS servers — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:21 AM (1/4)
• don't know — J.Green, November 6 @ 12:24 AM (1/3)
• registrar function — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:33 AM (1/2)
• money on the table! — J.Green, November 6 @ 12:37 AM (1/1)
• projections — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:44 AM (0/0)
• Legal responcibility? — Ted Hanks, November 5 @ 10:57 PM (0/0)
• global focus — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 10:53 PM (0/0)
• Unclear financial costs and structure — griffiths, November 5 @ 9:56 PM (2/2)
• to griffiths — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 10:14 PM (0/0)
• costs — Ted Hanks, November 5 @ 10:06 PM (0/0)
• separation of commercial and pesonal domains — Ted Hanks, November 5 @ 9:13 PM (1/2)
• separation of communication & commerce — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 9:29 PM (1/1)
• Fred-in reply to your last post — Ted Hanks, November 5 @ 9:59 PM (0/0)
• Accounting discrepancies — hunter, November 5 @ 4:09 AM (1/1)
• you're outdoing youself! — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 9:48 PM (0/0)
• Clarification of financial information — Hunter, November 4 @ 9:55 AM (0/0)
• Multiple people with the same name — Hunter, November 4 @ 9:46 AM (1/1)
• some smart solution! — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 9:44 PM (0/0)
• .NOM  sounds too much like .COM — julie, November 4 @ 4:14 AM (1/3)
• RE: .NOM  sounds too much like .COM — faure, November 5 @ 12:38 AM (1/2)
• confusion over the .nom — Ted Hanks, November 5 @ 9:36 PM (1/1)
• to Ted Hanks — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 9:51 PM (0/0)
• tech view of .nom — techchick, November 4 @ 2:54 AM (0/0)
• .nom- CORE or dotnom consortium? — Ted Hanks, November 4 @ 2:46 AM (0/0)
• dotNOM Consortium — Walter Bergfeld, November 4 @ 12:29 AM (0/0)
• .nom — alireza, November 3 @ 9:04 PM (1/1)
• disclosure — Ted Hanks, November 4 @ 2:23 AM (0/0)
• .NOM can be great — alireza, November 3 @ 8:57 PM (0/0)
• Same problem... — PHXbird, November 3 @ 5:50 PM (1/2)
• to PHXbird — phil browning, November 3 @ 7:07 PM (1/1)
• Exactly my point! — PHXbird, November 4 @ 5:55 PM (0/0)
• .nom — jedrink24, November 3 @ 5:34 PM (1/2)
• auctions the way to go — fredHanks, November 4 @ 2:11 AM (1/1)
• no auctions please — Fred Crampe, November 5 @ 10:30 PM (0/0)
• I agree with Jim Chen on .nom — BionicBro, November 3 @ 2:45 AM (0/0)
• dot whatever — PinkFish, November 3 @ 2:20 AM (1/3)
• easy, tex — bldigrn, November 3 @ 3:06 AM (2/2)
• warm hearts etc — J.Green, November 6 @ 12:39 AM (0/0)
• conflict of interest? — fredHanks, November 4 @ 2:15 AM (0/0)
• demand for .nom — Jim Chen, November 2 @ 8:53 PM (0/0)
• .NOM makes great sense — DRrandy, November 2 @ 5:56 AM (0/0)
• dotNOM — Jer072, November 2 @ 2:33 AM (1/1)
• .nom? — SamSingh, November 2 @ 8:39 PM (0/0)
• .nom proposal is an excellent idea — tiger74, November 2 @ 1:56 AM (0/0)
• .nom consortium — wayanna, November 2 @ 1:47 AM (0/0)
• .nom consortium — lindaw, November 2 @ 1:01 AM (0/0)
• wholesale price — UV, October 30 @ 5:50 PM (2/8)
• but does the internet user care? — Ted Hanks, November 4 @ 2:27 AM (0/0)
• The internet should be a utility — mayor, November 1 @ 6:02 AM (2/6)
• sweet spot for .nom price — Jim Chen, November 2 @ 8:56 PM (1/1)
• but how? — phil browning, November 2 @ 10:16 PM (0/0)
• .nom- a promising proposal (Reply to Mayor's post) — Phil Browning, November 1 @ 11:48 PM (1/3)
• like the dotNOM application — Matt Simons, November 2 @ 12:12 AM (1/2)
• reply to Matt — Carla, November 2 @ 1:57 AM (1/1)
• .nom applications — Skull, November 2 @ 2:13 AM (0/0)
• Excellent Proposal — cbuck@usc.edu, October 27 @ 7:04 PM (0/0)
• Confusion about .TV�s finances — Hunter, October 27 @ 4:18 AM (0/0)
• How does the applicant propose handling multiple people with the same name? — hunter, October 27 @ 3:42 AM (1/1)
• Any ideas? — Hastings, November 6 @ 12:53 AM (0/0)
• .nom vs .com/.net for individuals — stvtron, October 26 @ 11:59 PM (0/0)
• .nom proposal looks good — dc, October 26 @ 11:39 PM (1/2)
• registry price — Phil Browning, November 2 @ 6:48 PM (1/1)
• $3.50 cost vs. NSI's $6 — bldigrn, November 2 @ 7:19 PM (0/0)
• .nom, .pro — nschlegel, October 25 @ 3:48 PM (0/0)
• Proposition to ICANN, Applicants & Internet Community — Pistoff, October 18 @ 6:25 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy