Abel Wisman wrote:
"Americanist"? What is Americanist about the notion that:Your "Americanist" approach is close to ignorance and your examples hold little more then proving your own wrongs.
-companies anywhere in the world who concentrate on worldwide business try to register in .com
- companies outside the US who want to focus their business in their home countries register in their ccTLD
- companies in the US who want to focus on US business register in .com because there's no real alternative hostorically
... what's "Americanist" about that? It's obvious.
Quoting non-existent rfc's, trying to prove a wrong point without thenI made one RFC error (webmaster) and explained it, and corrected one RFC error made by someone else (postmaster).
pinpointing on what rfc's you DO base your extremely biased opinion
seems to be to difficult and therefore eludes you completely.
And you SHOULD have to pay exorbitant fees for that. What difference does it make if a website is up or down? You can't defer your property taxes because your home is being repaired.YES once you have gone past OUR 40 days, of which at least 30 days your website was down, you have to pay these ridiculous fees, PREVENT them.
.org was never restricted, and I didn't say it was restricted. It just stands to reason that if .com is for commercial activities, they shouldn't skunk their way into other TLDs just because they feel like it. I said I *wish* it was reserved for non-profits, because a separate TLD would be useful for them.NO dot org and dot net are less restricted then you make it, even as planned to be or you have in formation from Postel direct of which I would love to see some proof.
Try a search engine. I have posts from IP-connected sites going back to 1985.Disregarding the fact that in my opinion you entered "the net" in the past 3 years, you are talking a lot of baloney.
