Re: [atlarge-discuss] 006 Deciding Name for Organisation

["todd glassey" <todd.glassey@worldnet.att.net>]

You know - I would agree except that I would also point out that using the @
sign to replace the word "at" in the name is a real difference in the old
name. Its also trade markable... still if it is not to have the @ sign in it
as the word AT then we need to probably come up with something totally new.

Todd

---- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Henderson" <richardhenderson@ntlworld.com>
To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 6:10 AM
Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] 006 Deciding Name for Organisation


> If we MUST use the atLarge name at all, I prefer worldatlarge.com /
> world@large
>
> We have to be distinctive - I've already admitted that I quite like the
use
> of the word "world" to indicate we represent the whole world, and it says
to
> ICANN and the public, hey! the whole world is involved in this - it's our
> internet and we should be running it
>
> Having said that, I'd still prefer a totally distinctive organisation
name,
> which defines us as a clearly independent movement
>
> But I could live with worldatlarge.
>
> AtLarge by itself seems bland in the extreme, is easily confused, is
little
> understood by most non-techy sorts (eg most of the world) - and I think to
> claim to be THE at large might be challenged by other groups just now
> (though our claim will be stronger as soon as we achieve our large
> membership)
>
> I'd go with world@large and then have uk@large, france@large etc etc....
> even if we didn't get all the domain names, we could still link from the
> central world@large page and title the national sites uk@large, etc ,
maybe
> with shared logo etc.
>
> Just thoughts...
>
> Richard
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Alexander Svensson <alexander@svensson.de>
> To: <atlarge-discuss@lists.fitug.de>
> Sent: Saturday, August 10, 2002 1:14 PM
> Subject: Re: [atlarge-discuss] 006 Deciding Name for Organisation
>
>
> >
> > Just a quick note on the naming issue: I believe atlarge.org would
> > be a stupid choice -- people will confuse at-large.org and atlarge.org
> > over and over again! Something with "At Large" is fine, but the name
> > should not be confusingly similar to another existing group.
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
> For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de
>
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-unsubscribe@lists.fitug.de
For additional commands, e-mail: atlarge-discuss-help@lists.fitug.de