We are searching for you. Please wait...

Oh My [dot] good! Why We Love our New Dot and the Story Behind it

Considering Our New Brand and Logo, There is More to That ‘Dot’ Than Meets the Eye.

by Ethan McRohan
Contributing Editor at thedotgood

When it was clear that we would shift from NGO Advisor to The Dot Good, someone immediately thought of finding a domain name for the new platform ending with a cool gTLD, generic Top-Level Domain such as .org, .net… What a beautiful thing would it be to have thedot.good

There was no way we wanted to go for a .ngo knowing that we felt the term to be outdated and wanted to term more inclusive and more open to new models and ideas. Also, something that would put at ease leading organizations (NGOs) that claim a majority of their funds for public taxpayer money whether directly or indirectly from one or several governments. For the best, the [.good] gTLD doesn’t exist in fact. And nobody owns it. A few years ago, when the ICANN – the U.S. agent for managing and monetizing the Internet root zone management and its key assets, namely all IP addresses (at least the IPv4) and all TLDs – decided to grow the business of TLDs it could hardly create new countries to generate more ccTLDs (country code Top Level Domains), at least until the Federation of Russia becomes a new multitude. In 2014, it was possible for ICANN to launch new generic TLDs and sell them to the highest bidder. A genius idea. Name it and you have it: dot babe, dot New York, dot blue, dot money, including the dot ngo that fell into Public Interest’s basket as it was financing ISOC through its past monetization of the [.org].

The dot good was originally part of the potential successful new TLDs listed by ICANN. It had great potential, probably one the highest estimate when put on auction. You can name anything ending with [.good] and it is immediately acclaimed. However, the term ‘good’ comes with not just moral ground but theological baggage. The idea of selling a [.good] started a war. Religions were all against such a grand bargain and they defeated ICANN by strongly opposing someone to own the [.good]. People were to go crazy with a [.babe] but not with a [.good]. Gods were vigilant and the project turned out to be an idea with a [.bad].

To us, it was a beautiful conclusion. We didn’t want to control or own anything ending with [.good]. Our objective was simpler: We wanted to make sure that the Social Good Sphere had the opportunity to have a new Power House. And, of course, put on a little smile that would be sufficient for us to feel the good coming with it in the end.


Related articles