View Full Version : Choosing a domain name
ktinkel
08-27-2005, 01:44 PM
Useful article exploring various aspects of domain name selection and use: “Tips on Choosing a Good Domain Name (http://www.thesitewizard.com/archive/domainname.shtml)” by Christopher Heng of TheSiteWizard.
Discusses length of the name (ease of remembering it vs ease of typing); whether (or when) to use a hyphen in your name; pros and cons of using alternate domain types (.net or .biz rather than .com, for example); and more.
terrie
08-27-2005, 01:52 PM
I just recently went through this with my sister when I was helping her set up email hosting at myhosting.com...the name she really wanted was taken and we were able to find an alternative that didn't have too many additional charaters...
He's got some really intersting info...thanks...
Terrie
dacoyle
08-27-2005, 09:22 PM
Kathleen,
Very appropriate, considering what Lois posted a few days ago, the unfortunate choosing of "NineDaysofArt" for a URL.
I'll check out the article later, but my two cents, I always prefer shorter (and sometimes, having multiple domain names pointing to the same site...especially if you change the primary name, maintain the old version at least for a couple years.)
My agla.org was originally agla-va.org, but agla.org came available about a year later and we snatched it up quickly. We still kept agla-va.org active as many sites link to us and it took me a LONG time notifiy everyone and wait for links to get updated.
And a lesson learned from politicians; sometimes, it's in your best interest to register all variations and .com .net and .org just so your opposition can't set up an alternate site.
(later) OK, now I've read the article. It's rather basic and I disagree with parts of it. But some very good points.
Yes, hypens can be problematic and that's why I'm glad we got control of agla.org. But I disagree that longer names can sometimes be best; the fastest to type or remember is the rule of thumb I always use, which is why I fought against the standupforequality.org site I did last year. I just think it's too long to type, but it is easy to remember.
As to .net, .org, .com, in most cases this is easy but often abused. .net is a provider or host company. .org is a nonprofit, though not necessarily tax deductible. .com is commercial. For my candidate sites, some are .com and some are .org; I prefer .org but there's no clear choice on this. Do we need a .pol?
The article does cover some of the basics, but it could use an update.
ktinkel
08-28-2005, 08:51 AM
… my two cents, I always prefer shorter (and sometimes, having multiple domain names pointing to the same site...especially if you change the primary name, maintain the old version at least for a couple years.)
My agla.org was originally agla-va.org, but agla.org came available about a year later and we snatched it up quickly. We still kept agla-va.org active as many sites link to us and it took me a LONG time notifiy everyone and wait for links to get updated.Short (meaningful) names are ideal, but they are often hard to get. We faced that problem here, as every variation we could think of on DTP and desktop publishing were taken, so we settled for something logical, assuming that most users would bookmark it anyway, so would seldom need to type in all those letters!
The names I really dislike are cryptic strings — often initials of the business name — that I always have to look up to remember.
And a lesson learned from politicians; sometimes, it's in your best interest to register all variations and .com .net and .org just so your opposition can't set up an alternate site.Politicians and many businesses.
Yes, hypens can be problematic and that's why I'm glad we got control of agla.org. But I disagree that longer names can sometimes be best; the fastest to type or remember is the rule of thumb I always use, which is why I fought against the standupforequality.org site I did last year. I just think it's too long to type, but it is easy to remember.See above. Do not exactly disagree, but prefer memorable (even if hard to type) to hard to remember.
As to .net, .org, .com, in most cases this is easy but often abused. .net is a provider or host company. .org is a nonprofit, though not necessarily tax deductible. .com is commercial. For my candidate sites, some are .com and some are .org; I prefer .org but there's no clear choice on this. Do we need a .pol?Not a bad idea — if only to give readers fair warning when the site is ambiguous (as the ones of yours I’ve seen are not). But .com is either incorrect or unfortunate! <g>
The article does cover some of the basics, but it could use an update.I guess this thread can update it here, then!
dthomsen8
08-28-2005, 10:21 AM
Short or long? Is
www.fairmountca.org (http://www.fairmountca.org)
better than
www.fairmountcivicassociation.org (http://www.fairmountcivicassociation.org)
when Fairmount, CA might be the interpretation?
We are using both.
Short or long? Is
www.fairmountca.org (http://www.fairmountca.org)
better than
www.fairmountcivicassociation.org (http://www.fairmountcivicassociation.org)
when Fairmount, CA might be the interpretation?
We are using both.
Why not use a Solomonic approach and cut that baby in half -- use something like www.fairmountcivic.org?
donmcc
08-28-2005, 01:50 PM
I think long names are less important these days. I suspect that most referrals to a site are from links, and once there the bookmark or history keep me coming back. I don't think I have ever had to type the name of this forum. I got here the first time from a link that KT put into a message on Adobe forums, and it's been a bookmark since.
Only in the case where a person sees an URL in print, on TV, or the side of a truck is typing it in necessary, and I think that is a fairly small source for most sites.
Don McCahill
dacoyle
08-28-2005, 05:14 PM
Why not use a Solomonic approach and cut that baby in half -- use something like www.fairmountcivic.org?
Exactly what I was going to suggest. The first could have been anything in Fairmount, but your Solomon solution should be clear to most users.
dacoyle
08-28-2005, 05:17 PM
Kathleen,
I just enjoy it when we agree so much. <g>
Not a bad idea — if only to give readers fair warning when the site is ambiguous (as the ones of yours I’ve seen are not). But .com is either incorrect or unfortunate! <g>
Glad to know my sites aren't ambiguous. Especially for the political sites, I strive to make it clear what they are. I'm not sure .pol is the best extension... but I wish there was a dedicated extension for campaign sites. Something as structured as for .gov and .edu sites; only the campaign would be able to register any variation. No chance of scalpers.
dacoyle
08-28-2005, 05:18 PM
Only in the case where a person sees an URL in print, on TV, or the side of a truck is typing it in necessary, and I think that is a fairly small source for most sites.Don McCahill
Depends on the site. Other than my FT job, every site I do still requires lots of printed material. And I insist the web URL is on every single piece of printed material. Especially for campaign sites, it's critical. Also for nonprofits.
Exactly what I was going to suggest.
Glad to see we're on the same page, Dennis!
ktinkel
08-28-2005, 06:21 PM
Glad to know my sites aren't ambiguous. Especially for the political sites, I strive to make it clear what they are. I'm not sure .pol is the best extension... but I wish there was a dedicated extension for campaign sites. Something as structured as for .gov and .edu sites; only the campaign would be able to register any variation. No chance of scalpers.Sounds like a good idea to me. Which is not to say it has a chance in hell, mind you! <g> Much too straightforward and logical. <g>
I wish there was a dedicated extension for campaign sites. Something as structured as for .gov and .edu sites; only the campaign would be able to register any variation. No chance of scalpers.
Great idea, but you'll never convince most people that anything other than .com is a good thing. Even .org leaves them wondering. "But it's called Dot Com!"
dacoyle
08-29-2005, 07:42 AM
Great idea, but you'll never convince most people that anything other than .com is a good thing. Even .org leaves them wondering. "But it's called Dot Com!"
Unfortunately, true. At least I have a "rep" in Nova so most candidates know to just do whatever I say. ;>
At least I have a "rep" in Nova so most candidates know to just do whatever I say. ;>
And given how much you do for them, often pro bono, they'd BETTER listen to you!!!
ktinkel
08-29-2005, 04:40 PM
And given how much you do for them (Nova), often pro bono, they'd BETTER listen to you!!!Really!!
dacoyle
08-30-2005, 07:17 AM
And given how much you do for them, often pro bono, they'd BETTER listen to you!!!
It's always pro bono, at least for now. This spring nearly did me in, though. Already started warning candidates I can't keep this up if there are multiple candidates asking for my help.
It's always pro bono, at least for now. This spring nearly did me in, though. Already started warning candidates I can't keep this up if there are multiple candidates asking for my help.
I'm about to give you a word I know it's hard for you to use, but you're going to have to learn it, and use it, occasionally:
"NO."
dacoyle
08-30-2005, 09:26 AM
I'm about to give you a word I know it's hard for you to use, but you're going to have to learn it, and use it, occasionally:
"NO."
I'm familiar with the concept, but most of these people are friends of mine now and I'd like to keep them in office. Their sites were truly dreadful before I came around. ;>
I'm familiar with the concept, but most of these people are friends of mine now and I'd like to keep them in office. Their sites were truly dreadful before I came around. ;>
Let's see here... if everyone who asks you gets a "yes" and they all become your friends and need help into the future, you're going to end up giving up minor life activities... you know, like sleeping...
ktinkel
08-30-2005, 04:19 PM
Let's see here... if everyone who asks you gets a "yes" and they all become your friends and need help into the future, you're going to end up giving up minor life activities... you know, like sleeping...I betcha! <g>
Dennis is obviously a very good and loyal friend!
Dennis is obviously a very good and loyal friend!
He's also quite a talented web designer, and if I could just convince him that I'm a worthy political candidate in NOVA, I might con ... er, convince... him to redo my site!
ktinkel
08-31-2005, 05:16 AM
He's also quite a talented web designer, and if I could just convince him that I'm a worthy political candidate in NOVA, I might con ... er, convince... him to redo my site!So — what office are you going to run for? :-)
So — what office are you going to run for? :-)
If "Chief Cook and Bottle Washer" an elected post???
dacoyle
08-31-2005, 08:38 AM
Let's see here... if everyone who asks you gets a "yes" and they all become your friends and need help into the future, you're going to end up giving up minor life activities... you know, like sleeping...
what's sleep?
I doubt I'll ever let it get this out of control again. 3 of the races are re-elections and I already had the sites in place. Of the 3, two were in fine shape. The third wasn't my best work, but had Dreamweaver templates attached so once I had a better design ready it took 5 minutes to update the entire site.
The other 2 races had terrible web sites, but 1 of those is over and all the re-elections are running unopposed so I'm down to my 2 nonprofits and one active race. Oh, and organizing a team for the DC AIDS Walk. (Dave recently took a job to organize the walk, so I'm walking for the first time.)
Dennis
Oh, and organizing a team for the DC AIDS Walk. (Dave recently took a job to organize the walk, so I'm walking for the first time.)
Oh rats... I meant to get to your support site. I'll do it this week!
ktinkel
08-31-2005, 01:11 PM
If "Chief Cook and Bottle Washer" an elected post???Hmmm. Maybe in FoodTV land! <g>
Hmmm. Maybe in FoodTV land! <g>
Hmmm... that wouldn't give me much of a website, personally! (I like to cook, but hate to clean up, so having a food website wouldn't be a very good idea...)
ktinkel
08-31-2005, 01:21 PM
Hmmm... that wouldn't give me much of a website, personally! (I like to cook, but hate to clean up, so having a food website wouldn't be a very good idea...)Better a food website than actually cooking! <g>
ElyseC
08-31-2005, 06:25 PM
Hmmm... that wouldn't give me much of a website, personally! (I like to cook, but hate to clean up, so having a food website wouldn't be a very good idea...)My niece's husband is an executive chef. He cooks and my niece cleans up.
"Jack Sprat could eat no fat, his wife could eat no lean, and so betwixt the two of them they licked the platter clean."
Better a food website than actually cooking! <g>
Better finding someone to clean up so I can cook! THEN maybe I'd do a food website.
My niece's husband is an executive chef. He cooks and my niece cleans up. "Jack Sprat could eat no fat, his wife could eat no lean, and so betwixt the two of them they licked the platter clean."
ROFL! Good match. I need someone to clean up. I really like to cook, and I'm a pretty good cook, but I loathe the cleanup (especially since I am not, repeat NOT, a neat cook).
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.