Discuss mailing list

[vv AT cgs.pw]

I don't see the reason for charging money. Turning this into
a commercial project seems a bit strange within the current
OpenNIC culture.

Why would someone pay for a FreeNIC domain? It is not
worth anything at this time and isn't likely to be of
monetary value within our lifetime. The operator would
likely not even make the ten bucks annual operating costs.

I say, keep OpenNIC free of business enterprises, pretend
or otherwise.

Regards,
         Ole Juul

---
> re: free then costs
> I personally charge from the get go and would suggest it. You won't be
> able to use 'free' to market the tld  but with operation cost pricing you
> don't have to. You just use 'op cost pricing' instead. You can always
> offer free for those with less funds or just wanting to get their feet
> wet. In fact you can charge costs on a sliding scale based on the
> registrants income.
> Whichever way you go doesn't change my vote. I'm good with the current
> proposal either way.
> --
> Sent from myMail app for Android Saturday, 19 November 2016, 01:44PM
> -05:00 from Christopher < weblionx AT gmail.com> :
>
>>My suggestion regarding costs is either to charge for domains to start
>>with, or never charge for domains. Starting free with the option to
>>charge later is asking for abuse if it becomes popular.
>>
>>I would suggest: domains are always free, but extra optional services
>>can be charged for (e.g. acting as secondary nameserver to the domain,
>>website hosting, VPN end-points, things that enhance having a domain
>>through the service but are not required to own the domain).
>>
>>
>>
>>On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 10:45 PM, Maiyannah Bishop
>>< maiyannah.bishop AT postactiv.com > wrote:
>>> Is there a OpenNIC TLD that currently charges for registration?  None
>>> comes
>>> to mind, but I'm not at a machine on OpenNIC DNS to check.  I certainly
>>> didn't pay for my .indy name.
>>>
>>> This is just my personal opinion, but I am okay with an operator
>>> collecting
>>> donations to defray costs, I would be less okay with knowing my domain
>>> could
>>> end up being something that costs me down the line.  That seems rather
>>> bait
>>> and switch to me (get a bunch of people in with free domains, oh hey,
>>> it's
>>> paid now if you want to keep them!)  And whether the reasons for the
>>> costs
>>> are benign or not (and I don't doubt you when you say you want it as a
>>> just-in-case policy, by the way) - a lot of people probably would not
>>> extend
>>> you the benefit of that doubt, given previous stunts ICANN has pulled.
>>>
>>> I'd actually rather it just be paid up front than "maybe paid in some
>>> circumstance outside of my own personal control" - though I'm not sure
>>> how
>>> the operators of OpenNIC feel about this, I'm just a user at the
>>> present
>>> time :)
>>>
>>> (Given some though to hosting a DNS server, but I would have to
>>> familiarize
>>> myself with OpenNIC's own administrative policies first, as an aside)
>>>
>>> Seeing whereas I don't like offering criticism like that without
>>> offering
>>> some sort of solution therefore, I think a reasonable compromise might
>>> be to
>>> say that particularly high-use domains may find themselves levied with
>>> fees?
>>> If you were to turn to charging domain holders out of infrastructure
>>> needs,
>>> it seems reasonable to my mind that the people to pay up in this case
>>> would
>>> be the ones placing the most demand on the infrastructure.  And that
>>> would
>>> keep the spirit of it being "just in case of emergency"
>>> -mb
>>>
>>> On 2016-11-18 22:26, Jonah Aragon wrote:
>>>
>>> The costs of existing domains won't change or be charged for, and no
>>> domain
>>> will be revoked (at least, solely due to price changes), however, in
>>> the
>>> event prices are raised, future domains and domain renewals will cost
>>> whatever amount is arranged.
>>>
>>> Does that clear it up? I thought that was clear but I can change the
>>> wording
>>> of the charter if it isn't.
>>>
>>> Jonah
>>>
>>> P.S. it should be noted that we most likely won't charge for domains at
>>> all,
>>> that's kind of a "just in case" policy.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Nov 18, 2016 9:11 PM, "Daniel Quintiliani" < danq AT runbox.com >
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I approve a ".o" but:
>>>>
>>>> "Registrations will be available from 3 month to 2 year periods. All
>>>> registrations will be available for free after approval, however, the
>>>> modernTLD administration holds the right to raise prices as needed to
>>>> cover
>>>> operating costs."
>>>>
>>>> Does this mean all ".o" domains can be revoked before the 3 month to 2
>>>> year expiration date if you decide you need money? You shouldn't
>>>> charge for,
>>>> or change the price of, existing domains before their expiration date,
>>>> and
>>>> make that clear in the charter.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> -Dan Q
>>
>>
>>--------
>>You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
>>You may unsubscribe by emailing
>> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>
>
> --------
> You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list.
> You may unsubscribe by emailing
> discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org
>



--------
You are a member of the OpenNIC Discuss list. 
You may unsubscribe by emailing discuss-unsubscribe AT lists.opennicproject.org