Return to tldapps Forum - Message Thread - FAQ

Username:	Andy_Grein
Date/Time:	Sun, November 5, 2000 at 5:14 AM GMT
Browser:	Microsoft Internet Explorer V5.5 using Windows 98
Score:	5
Subject:	support for .i tld application
Message:
I would like to add my strong support for this application. As someone who teaches about and does research on the impact of technology on consumer markets, the concept of an individual level domain strikes me as being an excellent way to organize web communications given the proliferation of devices and communications media.  Moving the web to the level of individual identifiers as opposed to the current organization-based system also has powerful implications for the public's perception of fairness and ownership over what is truly a community resource. Andreas Grein Associate Professor of Marketing and International Business Zicklin School of Business, Baruch College, CUNY

Message Thread:

• .i Application by Sarnoff Corporation — Moderator, October 7 @ 10:21 PM (30/38)
• .i TLD and Single Letters — B. Ferns, November 5 @ 8:41 PM (0/0)
• A completely outsourced solution - with some interesting costs — griffiths, November 5 @ 8:09 PM (0/0)
• Time for a people-centric TLD — skey, November 5 @ 7:42 PM (0/0)
• a badly needed idea!!! — spareek, November 5 @ 5:09 PM (0/0)
• .i proposal — manishie, November 5 @ 5:04 PM (0/0)
• Delighted by the .i submission from Sarnoff — rp@1sta.net, November 5 @ 9:57 AM (0/0)
• Support for this application and some suggestions — steve smith, November 4 @ 1:06 PM (0/0)
• A powerful structure for ubiquitous personal communications. — d_reininger, November 4 @ 12:30 AM (0/0)
• people centric TLD for connecting people - great concept — mott, November 3 @ 9:31 PM (0/0)
• MESSAGE — simonb, November 3 @ 6:42 PM (1/1)
• I can see the equality angle in dot i. — snowman, November 5 @ 10:18 PM (0/0)
• Support for .i tld — Wendy Suen, November 3 @ 5:57 PM (0/0)
• Great Concept! — phillipgb, November 3 @ 5:51 PM (1/1)
• The non-transferability provision is good — user106, November 5 @ 11:03 PM (0/0)
• Agreement that .i makes strategic sense for the Internet — JNathenson, November 3 @ 1:19 PM (1/1)
• support for .i tld application — Andy_Grein, November 5 @ 5:14 AM (0/0)
• .i proposal from sarnoff — jcienski, November 3 @ 1:08 PM (0/0)
• .i Proposal from Sarnoff Corporation. — jtodd, November 1 @ 6:09 PM (0/0)
• .i is good for the internet — Donovan, November 1 @ 12:18 AM (1/1)
• .i is a great idea — vachanip, November 3 @ 5:17 AM (0/0)
• Help solve the glut of domain names — pdesilva, November 1 @ 2:53 AM (0/0)
• New People centric TLD .i — ThomasGeorge, October 31 @ 8:54 PM (0/0)
• .geo plus .i = ? — adoyle, October 31 @ 8:23 PM (1/1)
• Sarnoff and SRI operate as independent entities — Proposal Team, November 5 @ 11:31 PM (0/0)
• TLD for individuals, an excellent idea. — AmitKapoor, October 30 @ 3:22 PM (0/0)
• .i could be my buddy. — vpincus, October 30 @ 2:40 PM (0/0)
• .i for the masses. — JosephMathew, October 26 @ 4:35 PM (0/0)
• Single character gTLDs are a bad idea — mikel5, October 26 @ 1:52 PM (1/3)
• What's  wrong with single-character TLDs? — jpolaski, October 27 @ 4:28 AM (1/2)
• I believe 1 character gTLDs will be hard to use — mikel5, October 27 @ 6:46 PM (1/1)
• .i single digit tld — vpincus, October 30 @ 3:02 PM (0/0)
• Sounds great, but what about user and community control ? — Dom, October 26 @ 8:28 AM (0/0)
• .i proposal — peniel, October 26 @ 12:04 AM (0/0)
• What values are envisioned to be associated with .i names? — McQuilWP, October 25 @ 8:40 PM (0/0)
• .i proposal works for the developing world — shyam, October 24 @ 6:53 AM (0/0)
• Bad idea — sjk, October 19 @ 7:44 AM (0/0)
• Proposition to ICANN, Applicants & Internet Community — Pistoff, October 18 @ 6:09 PM (0/0)
• Great application and concept — huguesdb, October 16 @ 11:32 PM (0/0)

Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Cookies Policy