I was on the application for the .name top level domain back in 2000 and then there was a reasonable excuse for that - we were in the first new batch of TLDs. We had to contact a lot of site owners to try to smooth the path. But given the number of new TLDs since, you'd think people would've learnt.
Tradeoff: Failing to accept a limited number of rarer domain. Vs. all the errors caused by idiots who can't spell mgail.com, or gmail.cmo, or gmali.com, gmail.kom, or whatever the heck that thing is.
Excluding people from services because you can't be bothered to handle their perfectly correct and validated email address is actually a form of discrimination.
My pet hate is my bank refusing to email me bank statement notifications to mail@mydomain.com ("not a personal address"), yet their password validation and marketing emails get through quite OK. Somehow they seem incapable of acknowledging that one department of the bank has made a technical decision in conflict with other departments...
I was on the application for the .name top level domain back in 2000 and then there was a reasonable excuse for that - we were in the first new batch of TLDs. We had to contact a lot of site owners to try to smooth the path. But given the number of new TLDs since, you'd think people would've learnt.
I have a .name account and still occasionally run into sites that don't accept it.
This drives me insane. Lazy input boxes that only accept email domains from the big names.
Tradeoff: Failing to accept a limited number of rarer domain. Vs. all the errors caused by idiots who can't spell mgail.com, or gmail.cmo, or gmali.com, gmail.kom, or whatever the heck that thing is.
Excluding people from services because you can't be bothered to handle their perfectly correct and validated email address is actually a form of discrimination.
My pet hate is my bank refusing to email me bank statement notifications to mail@mydomain.com ("not a personal address"), yet their password validation and marketing emails get through quite OK. Somehow they seem incapable of acknowledging that one department of the bank has made a technical decision in conflict with other departments...
2 replies →