Comments on: Why we went with the .WS TLD https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/ - Taking museum and art collections to the cloud Sun, 19 May 2013 12:16:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Sree https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1478 Sree Sun, 19 May 2013 12:16:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1478 Currently .ws is preferable for Pro & Experts as because its the only domain TLD, which belongs to less limitation than others. So is .ws you are safe enough to get niche web threats and limitation. We can say .ws has near to ZERO Limitation of use comparing with others (and even .com/.net) Currently .ws is preferable for Pro & Experts as because its the only domain TLD, which belongs to less limitation than others. So is .ws you are safe enough to get niche web threats and limitation. We can say .ws has near to ZERO Limitation of use comparing with others (and even .com/.net)

]]> By: Chatterchit https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1454 Chatterchit Wed, 05 Sep 2012 13:24:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1454 Thank you. I appreciate your engagement. Thank you. I appreciate your engagement.

]]> By: Asif N https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1453 Asif N Tue, 04 Sep 2012 12:50:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1453 Fair enough - I said official version, not justification. The information about TLDs qualifies why we chose .ws. The "Hegelian" opening was meant to set context for the information provided because a general explanation is not really necessary (unless someone asks). And now that you have, let me restate why we chose .ws. 1. .COM was not available 2. .WS is a widely accepted as a gTLD domain for both marketing as well as technical SEO purposes (this is where some of the irrelevant ramble may help) 3. It does not restrict us to any particular platforms (like .mobi does, for instance) 4. Unlike any other ccTLDs or sTLDs that are marketed or accepted by major search engines as gTLDs, .WS is and should be more stable because of the affiliate with Global Domains International Thank you for your feedback - I will add the information to make the article too. Fair enough – I said official version, not justification. The information about TLDs qualifies why we chose .ws. The “Hegelian” opening was meant to set context for the information provided because a general explanation is not really necessary (unless someone asks). And now that you have, let me restate why we chose .ws.

1. .COM was not available
2. .WS is a widely accepted as a gTLD domain for both marketing as well as technical SEO purposes (this is where some of the irrelevant ramble may help)
3. It does not restrict us to any particular platforms (like .mobi does, for instance)
4. Unlike any other ccTLDs or sTLDs that are marketed or accepted by major search engines as gTLDs, .WS is and should be more stable because of the affiliate with Global Domains International

Thank you for your feedback – I will add the information to make the article too.

]]> By: Chatterchit https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1452 Chatterchit Tue, 04 Sep 2012 11:32:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1452 Thank you for your reply. Actually, it was you yourself who framed this piece as a justification, by beginning what otherwise is (indeed) an information piece with a Hegelian-type dialectical opening structure [your conversation with a friend "....who really could not understand the reason we run Vesica on the .ws TLD ... he was adamant that we can and only should use .COM. This has, of course, come up in the past ..."]. This dialectical device inherently means your "antithesis" is framed as a justification. But justification or information, that's neither here nor there. The point is most of the piece is simply information about TLDs (quite right there); and yet the piece is titled "Why we went with the .WS TLD" so your readers would therefore have a rightful expectation of coming away with an understanding about why you chose it. (I don't, I'm afraid, and I've read it a couple of times to see if I missed something.) Thank you for your reply.

Actually, it was you yourself who framed this piece as a justification, by beginning what otherwise is (indeed) an information piece with a Hegelian-type dialectical opening structure [your conversation with a friend "....who really could not understand the reason we run Vesica on the .ws TLD ... he was adamant that we can and only should use .COM. This has, of course, come up in the past ..."]. This dialectical device inherently means your “antithesis” is framed as a justification.

But justification or information, that’s neither here nor there. The point is most of the piece is simply information about TLDs (quite right there); and yet the piece is titled “Why we went with the .WS TLD” so your readers would therefore have a rightful expectation of coming away with an understanding about why you chose it. (I don’t, I’m afraid, and I’ve read it a couple of times to see if I missed something.)

]]> By: Asif N https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1451 Asif N Sun, 02 Sep 2012 00:26:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1451 I think you misunderstood. None of this is a justification - it's all just information. We don't have to justify anything. I think you misunderstood. None of this is a justification – it’s all just information. We don’t have to justify anything.

]]> By: Chatterchit https://vesica.ws/blog/2012/08/why-we-went-with-the-ws-tld/comment-page-1/#comment-1450 Chatterchit Sat, 01 Sep 2012 12:10:00 +0000 https://vesica.ws/blog/?p=499#comment-1450 After a mildly irrelevant ramble about TLDs, that's a bit of a feeble justification at the end of the piece for why you chose .ws. After a mildly irrelevant ramble about TLDs, that’s a bit of a feeble justification at the end of the piece for why you chose .ws.

]]>