Securing Generic Top-Level Domains for the Cardano Ecosystem
15 SPOs voted · 1 with a rationale
Open a row to read the rationale.
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesNo rationale
- YesRationale
I vote YES on the info action “Securing Generic Top-Level Domains for the Cardano Ecosystem” and submit this rationale for both SPO and DRep votes. Both roles are allowed to vote on info actions and in this particular instance community sentiment has been requested from both by the Cardano Foundation.
I support the proposed move to secure generic Top-Level Domains (gTLD) for the Cardano ecosystem. This rationale will outline the importance and priority of this proposal and remind anyone reading it why this proposal has been submitted for feedback.
The last gTLD application window opened in 2012 when the application window ran from 12 January 2012, until 12 April 2012, although a system glitch led to a temporary shutdown and a subsequent re-opening of the application system until 30 May 2012. During which time over 1,900 applications were received.
This will be the first time in the “crypto era” that an application window has been opened and I respect the proposal to pursue securing gTLDs for the Cardano ecosystem. It is highly likely that there will be a proliferation of applications from crypto companies and projects and we will likely see “.btc”, “.eth”, “.xrp”, “.sol”, etc, etc applications being made. It has been 13 years since the last application window and who knows how long it could be until the next one. Therefore, there is a sense of urgency here or we risk missing out and potentially finding ourselves in a situation 2-5 years down the line asking, “why don’t we have “.ada” domains like other protocols and projects?”. Too often we lament that the Cardano ecosystem is left out or missed out on new developments that the wider crypto space capitalised on, let’s not let this become another. I am happy to see the Cardano Foundation and their external advisors who are taking the initiative on this now. You can guarantee that if they didn’t, it would be yet another thing added to the list that this community likes to hold up as having been the CF’s responsibility but not taken, which is why I find the few “CF should be doing other things” responses that I have seen so far somewhat baffling.
It's okay to suggest that Intersect should be the stewards of any Cardano gTLD instead of the Cardano Foundation but you have to ask yourself who has put the work in already, what happens if Intersect doesn’t secure funding in 2-5 years’ time, who then takes over stewardship and how? As for concerns over the gatekeeping of address registrations, it is my understanding that registries that operate and maintain a specific gTLD are still regulated by ICANN.
Finally, for those asking why the info action is even necessary here. The info action was originally meant for the very purpose of collecting community feedback and sentiment on-chain, it has been somewhat forgotten about with so many budget info actions being submitted in 2025. It is also my understanding that the feedback from this info action will be used as part of the application process to show ICANN the level of community support and demand for securing gTLDs such a “.ada” and “.cardano”. It is also worth reiterating that this is an info action and not a budget info action and that the Cardano Foundation has stated that this is an initiative for which they are funding themselves.