On 1/10/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Fastfission</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:fastfission@gmail.com">fastfission@gmail.com</a>&gt; wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
I'm of course completely in favor of securing something outright if<br>that works and the name is good. I think though that it would be<br>better to have an awkward domain name (and blame it on the internet)<br>than to have an awkward conference name (which everyone will blame on
<br>us).</blockquote><div><br>That is a perfect point. We're much more about the conference and things in-person than we are about the online part (in such a way that the website only suppliments the conference, and not the other way around). So what if someone gets the domain? It goes along with other issues, like for example Windows 2000 has a domain at 
<a href="http://Windows2000.com">Windows2000.com</a>, I believe, that redirects to the subdomain of Microsoft's site (sorry for the evil empire reference, but it's what I could think of), and I think we could have the same thing here. People like myself are more likely to search using google or another search engine for something that I do not know the site for. I think it would be much the same with someone else. 
<br></div></div>