Discuss mailing list

[Amrit Panesar <apanesar AT 4195tech.com>]

Does .bit have a policy about purging/removing domains that do not have any records for X amount of time?

If not, this might be what is needed to help combat domain squatting

Else, lets think about the signal to noise ratio here. The .bit zone is huge, how much is content and how much spam?

Personally, I'm all for indoctrinating a new TLD, however those might be a couple issues some would to visit.

You have my vote, for now. However, I would like to see some statistics of the user-base as well as the amount of content. Hopefully the zone will be worth the memory (for those slaving zones on low memory configs).

Thanks

--Neo

Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 12, 2012, at 6:43 AM, Alex Nordlund <deep.alexander AT gmail.com> wrote:

On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 2:42 PM, <woodq11 AT gmail.com> wrote:

To understand my above statement about spam and squatting, one may want to
look at the Namecoin block explorer, which paints a fairly clear picture about
why Dot Bit has such a large number of domains.

e.g. The recent "beanie.bit" domain was registered, marked as "for sale," and
pointed to a porn site. While I have no problem with this in general (though I
think it's foolish), I don't feel that the OpenNIC project should worry about
acting as a gateway to it.

You convert Bitcoins to Namecoins and use Namecoins to "purchase" these domains, right?

---
//Alex