Re:Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own adviso...
by catalogia on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @10:01AM
(#22365991)
Alexa rank doesn't seem like a good way to do this. A great many organizations, some of which have considerable clout, aren't going to be in the top 100k Alexa ranked websites because they aren't popular internet companies. For instance un.org and un.int don't seem to be in the top 100k. Perhaps a special exception would be made for the United Nations, but that's just one example out myriads.
Using Alexa rank seems like a solution somebody with tunnel vision for the internet/tech industry would come up with. Volume of traffic isn't a good proxy for importance.
Re:Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own adviso...
by geofft on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @10:36AM
(#22366376)
Why don't we simply petition the Internet Society to hold prices fixed for all existing .org domains in the Alexa top 100K? That should be a small part of the potential profits of running .org, and anyone else can just register a domain name on .party or whatever. That way we avoid the cost of a transition to a new system.
Re:Internet Society told to halt .org sale by its own adviso...
by rasengan on Wednesday February 19, 2020 @11:02AM
(#22366671)
The problem isn’t just ISOC [1]. Further, there were both petitions and RFCs that were completely ignored by both ISOC and ICANN. I was a major donor to ISOC and even attempted to question this and was completely ignored.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2020/02/registrars-raise...
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/265770/most-popular-us-w...
[2] https://hsd-dev.org/guides/claims.html