Discuss mailing list

[Amunak <amunak AT amunak.net>]

I like this choice also because it's very unlikely that someone might register it with ICANN, as it's not really a word or anything.

Dne 10.06.2017 v 7:03 kevin napsal(a):

.faif

<free as in freedom>


On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 22:31 -0400, Daniel Quintiliani wrote:

Originally it was about the choice of the TLD .libre as a replacement for a noncommercial-only .free, when something like .noncom or .noncomm would be better suited since "libre" implies both commercial and noncommercial use.

--

-Dan Q


On Fri, 9 Jun 2017 19:28:24 -0700, <vv AT cgs.pw> wrote:

I think the discussion was not about the word,
nor choice thereof, but about the appropriateness
of the charter.

~ Ole


On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 22:20:21 -0400 (EDT)
"Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote:

"libre vs gratis" is used in the free software movement,
as the word "free" in English means both "free as in
freedom" (libre) and "free of charge" (gratis).

--

-Dan Q


On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:14:14 -0700, rhargrave
<roman AT hargrave.info> wrote:

I'm not up to speed on the .free replacement situation,
but has anyone suggested the charter of an entirely
novel domain deriving its name from the equivalent to
'free' in another language (like .libre)? Perhaps
choosing a word from a conlang like Esperanto would
also eliminate disagreements based on locality. The
charter could be basically identical to .free.

---- On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 19:03:21 -0700 vv AT cgs.pw wrote
----

I think your points are good, and look forward to 
some discussion about that. Commercial usage can 
sometimes be a problem in some environments, but 
I honestly don't think that's going to happen here. 
In fact I think we should be so lucky as to have 
commercial interest in our world. It might be good 
for us. 

That said, the basic ideas of liberty and freedom 
are not compatible with such harsh censorship as 
espoused by the .libre charter. In fact I think it 
is very wrong and certainly deceptive - I hope not 
deliberately so. 

Regards, 
Ole Juul 


On Fri, 09 Jun 2017 20:18:17 -0400 (EDT) 
"Daniel Quintiliani" <danq AT runbox.com> wrote: 
  

Hi, 

I really think we need to reopen the choice of
the .libre domain to replace .free. 

The reason being that the charter for .libre forbids 
commercial use while every use of .libre (FLOSS)
means "free as in freedom" including the freedom for
commercial use. Therefore .libre is
misleading. .libre is closer to .oss than it is
to .free. 

During the vote I suggested merging into .null, but
it was during the voting thread, there was no
discussion, and my vote to merge into .null wound up
being the only vote to do so. Also, .null is intended
for individuals, not organizations, so that was a bad
idea anyway. 

While it's still soon enough, I think we should
cancel the .libre domains and switch them to
something like: 

.noncom 
.noncomm 

or the like. 

I propose .noncom 

Does anyone agree with me on .libre being a bad idea,
and that we should rename it ASAP? 

-- 

-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

--------
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