8 ms·

With uncommon domain extensions I always fear that they might jack up the rates at some point in the future, going from $20/year to $250/year or even more. Sti

With uncommon domain extensions I always fear that they might jack up the rates at some point in the future, going from $20/year to $250/year or even more. Still, my personal site and email is on a fairly obscure country TLD, and I hope they will never do something like that, being a country and all. With these new TLDs for which companies paid large amounts of money, who knows what might happen? Does anyone know if such a bait and switch has ever happened in domain-land?

StuntPope 12y ago
.TV was close, they launched and segregated a bunch of domains off as "premium" and charged inflated prices. Then there was (IIRC) an episode where they wanted to renew a bunch of landrush domains at "premium" prices. They also don't allow "premium" domains to switch registrars. The new .WED rules are crazy. Year 3 renewal is $25,000. They think the next "Brad and Janet" want to be able to use BradAndJanet.WED for their wedding.
- johnchristopher 12y ago
  That might work out for bradandangelina though :]
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
thaumaturgy 12y ago
> With uncommon domain extensions I always fear that they might jack up the rates at some point in the future, going from $20/year to $250/year or even more. I sincerely wish that this would happen with all domain registrations. Maybe not $250/yr, but $100/yr would be OK. It wouldn't bother anybody that owns a few domains for business or even personal use. It would slow down spamming techniques that rely on registering lots of different domains. It would almost entirely halt domain squatting.
- mden 12y ago
  But then a lot of people wouldn't be able to afford owning a domain, which to me seems more evil than domain squatting. Artificially raising the prices hardly seems like a fair solution.
  - thaumasiotes 12y ago
    I'm not advocating this, but you could always have cheap registration for a .poverty domain, or some such.
    - eropple 12y ago
      I'll bet you just don't understand why the tech crowd is becoming vilified in San Francisco, too.
      - jamesbritt 12y ago
        I'd really like to think it was a clever, self-aware, parody comment. (The "I'm not advocating this" part seems to weaken this, though. )
        thaumasiotes 12y ago
        Well, I tend to agree with you that this a political impossibility. But I think it's worth thinking a bit about why you find it so outrageous. If the problem is "domain name registration might be unaffordable for the impoverished", what's the negative side to letting anyone at all have extremely cheap registration just by claiming to be poor? It's hassle-free price discrimination. Is it morally offensive to you when e.g. a company lets you use their software with prominent branding attached for cheap, or the same software, whitelabeled, for dear? If the problem isn't "domain name registration might be unaffordable for the impoverished"... maybe it's worth thinking about what the problem is?
        eropple 12y ago

StuntPope 12y ago

.TV was close, they launched and segregated a bunch of domains off as "premium" and charged inflated prices. Then there was (IIRC) an episode where they wanted to renew a bunch of landrush domains at "premium" prices. They also don't allow "premium" domains to switch registrars. The new .WED rules are crazy. Year 3 renewal is $25,000. They think the next "Brad and Janet" want to be able to use BradAndJanet.WED for their wedding.

johnchristopher 12y ago
That might work out for bradandangelina though :]

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

thaumaturgy 12y ago

> With uncommon domain extensions I always fear that they might jack up the rates at some point in the future, going from $20/year to $250/year or even more. I sincerely wish that this would happen with all domain registrations. Maybe not $250/yr, but $100/yr would be OK. It wouldn't bother anybody that owns a few domains for business or even personal use. It would slow down spamming techniques that rely on registering lots of different domains. It would almost entirely halt domain squatting.

mden 12y ago
But then a lot of people wouldn't be able to afford owning a domain, which to me seems more evil than domain squatting. Artificially raising the prices hardly seems like a fair solution.
- thaumasiotes 12y ago
  I'm not advocating this, but you could always have cheap registration for a .poverty domain, or some such.
  - eropple 12y ago
    I'll bet you just don't understand why the tech crowd is becoming vilified in San Francisco, too.
    - jamesbritt 12y ago
      I'd really like to think it was a clever, self-aware, parody comment. (The "I'm not advocating this" part seems to weaken this, though. )
      - thaumasiotes 12y ago
        Well, I tend to agree with you that this a political impossibility. But I think it's worth thinking a bit about why you find it so outrageous. If the problem is "domain name registration might be unaffordable for the impoverished", what's the negative side to letting anyone at all have extremely cheap registration just by claiming to be poor? It's hassle-free price discrimination. Is it morally offensive to you when e.g. a company lets you use their software with prominent branding attached for cheap, or the same software, whitelabeled, for dear? If the problem isn't "domain name registration might be unaffordable for the impoverished"... maybe it's worth thinking about what the problem is?
        eropple 12y ago