Does anyone know if subdomains on these gTLDs are required to be offered/sold publicly once acquired?
I don't understand how some of them can be granted to just one company when they are a "global" namespace, and then not allowed by the public to purchase or use.
I'm not talking about ones that are the name of a well known huge company that is unlikely to disappear.
ameliaquiningtoday at 8:18 PM
Suggestion: Allow the user to sort the list by number of applications.
varun_chtoday at 8:36 PM
so many TLDs that seem to be exploiting similarity to existing ones?
.cmo/.con are particularly egregious
gregdotcatoday at 8:54 PM
Very nice! Some more sorting and filtering options would be handy, and some more view options, so each TLD doesn't take up half the screen when it has a lot of applicants.
PS - Your Source link is a 404.
carefree-bobtoday at 9:29 PM
I don't want to see any new domains, we rely on the domain as a source of security -- I know, it sucks, but it's all we have, to look at that browser address bar and confirm it is really mybank.com that is asking for your login details, and each time someone adds a TLD, you have the risk of mybank.us, or mybank.info or mybank.bank confusing users. Enough already with the TLD.
skrtskrttoday at 8:51 PM
I have been looking for an expansion of TLDs that are short, have a decent ring for self-hosting stuff, and don't sound too scammy.
Like `.link` is pretty cool but it's expensive because one of those personal-link-inbio companies created it and wants to cash in on it.
Just from scanning these, maybe:
* .air
* .bit
* .hub
* .iam
* .index (long but I love how universal it is)
* .lab
* .log
* .pod
* .port
* .self is really interesting, wonder if that would take off
* .sys
* .zen
yatherntoday at 8:48 PM
Very useful! I found this article a really good summary of the gtld situation:
The auctioning off of the GTLD space for private gain is one of the most egregious and offensive public-private wealth transfer grafts of our century.
bhaneytoday at 8:44 PM
> .lan
Don't you dare, Coffee Danger LLC
gelstudiostoday at 8:54 PM
i'd like to see this (filter / exclude) the dotBrand or brand-specific TLDs, as they are not open to the general public.
like .playstation or .airbnb or .nike
pasc1878today at 8:42 PM
How many of these are companies that learnt from the 1990s and made sure they registered their own name/tradmarks etc rather than having to buy them off scalpers, even though they might have no plans to use them?
embedding-shapetoday at 8:29 PM
Finally .scam might be something for all us scammer, I'm tired of getting mixed up with a bunch of honest-looking people.
None of this seem to have any rhyme or reason. What's the reason for these to exists, besides to raise funds for whorever is selling these?
devmortoday at 8:47 PM
I'm exhausted by all of the new gTLDs at this point, opening them up to specific companies and organizations basically violated the entire purpose of a gTLD in the first place.
sixtyjtoday at 8:31 PM
Every possible word can become a TLD :)
deletedtoday at 9:08 PM
OutOfHeretoday at 8:41 PM
Why are these TLDs so tightly bound to a specific organization? Why can't their registration be more open? Keeping them so locked down makes them useless. Or am I misunderstanding something?
MarsIronPItoday at 8:29 PM
Am I the only one who's not a fan of these new, longer TLDs? IMO TLDs should be two or three characters. I'm not sure why I feel this way, but there's something unwieldy about a TLD like .cooking.