|
Actually, I agree with your comment that the domain registries / registrars shouldn't
be policing your web content. The original concept of the assignment of domain
names was that they would be appropriate for the nature of the *entity* that registered
them -- depending on whether it was a commercial company, a noncommercial organization,
a university, a government agency, etc. -- not the content that happens to be hosted
there, so a university wouldn't lose their .edu domain if they happened to let somebody
sell something commercially in a site within their domain. But since, except for
very limited categories like the new .museum and .aero domains, policing even the
nature of the entities is too difficult for a mass-market domain, it becomes necessary
to leave things up to an honor system in registration, where only the registrant
can judge whether, for instance, his personal hobby site that's mostly for fun but
might possibly also sell some stuff, ought to be a .com or a .org (or, soon, a .name
or a .info). Too bad, though, that there's so little honor in domain registration
these days, with the majority making not the slightest effort to pick names that
fit in the correct category... most just get ".com" names because all the other lemmings
are doing it, regardless of whether they're in any way commercial. This is
defensible for a personal site, as (until .name goes live) none of the current domain
endings really fit, so either .com or .org can be a reasonable choice from what's
available, but it's really silly that so many nonprofits, governmental bodies, etc.
are using those dumb-ass .com addresses that imply that they're really commercial.
"GoArmy.com"... bah, humbug.
--Dan
|
|
|