

TLD Applications from the Parent Company of .CO Revealed - tnd
http://www.elliotsblog.com/juan-diego-calles-straat-investments-reveals-gtld-applications-0829

======
astrodust
Some of these aren't entirely a bad idea, unlike .museum and .aero that were
surely peyote inspired.

Does anyone know about the parent company's behavior in a general sense? Can't
be worse than Verisign, right?

~~~
duskwuff
For .museum, keep in mind the proposal was written in a world before good
search engines, where directories still made sense. (Note that the .museum TLD
is highly hierarchical, and every non-"leaf" domain is an index of its
contents.) In today's search-driven world, it is, of course, entirely
unnecessary.

I'd argue that a lot of the more recent TLDs (like .asia, .coop, and .tel) are
far more ridiculous.

~~~
astrodust
Didn't Yahoo! and the Mozilla Directory already prove this was a bad idea long
before .museum showed up?

Too many expensive experiments in re-inventing history.

You're probably right that these are artifacts of an age when domains still
mattered, before Google and their like made your brand name far more
important.

~~~
duskwuff
Not really.

.museum was introduced in 2001 -- and, presumably, took a while to get to that
point. I imagine it was at least a few years in the making.

Yahoo didn't switch to crawler-based search (based on Inktomi, iirc?) until
2002.

------
arrowgunz
Now who in this world would want to have their domain names something like:

amazon.llc or facebook.inc?

.com/.net/.org makes a lot of sense. These gTLDs don't. IMHO.

------
duskwuff
404?

