Finding Total Telnames .Tel Registrations...

mikeseaton wrote:Obviously these total figures at 6,860 and 6,850 respectively are substantially less than the previous Telnames figure reported by dottel.net, since this would have included non-indexed (probably mostly empty) Telnames .tels.

Tim Spears wrote:The disappearance of dottel.net has one advantage: The business of Telnames becomes less transparent once again.

4444 wrote:... experts know the weaknesses of .tel anyway and won't buy a domain from Telnames.

Tim Spears wrote:

4444 wrote:... experts know the weaknesses of .tel anyway and won't buy a domain from Telnames.

This is also the reason why Telnic has reduced the communication with the community in 2011 and stopped it completely in 2012.

4444 wrote:

Tim Spears wrote:

4444 wrote:... experts know the weaknesses of .tel anyway and won't buy a domain from Telnames.

This is also the reason why Telnic has reduced the communication with the community in 2011 and stopped it completely in 2012.

A better strategy would be to work on reducing the weaknesses of the old product at Telnic instead to try selling a reduced and limited version at Telnames.

GoTel wrote:
old .tel and a handful of arrogant people using massive amounts of subdomains for a few bucks is what destroyed the entire .tel iniative.

@gotel wrote:Seasons Greetings .......... although such disinformation from you ?

TELwax wrote:Perhaps then in 2014, TELnic will finally refine Telpages capabilities, and enable TELpage to only display main "home" page of any TEL  (single page TEL, as well as  TELs with multiple subdirectories)  grouped smartly by thema or geo or etc...!!!

AGAIN it is not the fault of users of genuine subdirectory , if TElpages is so badly unefficient, althought hundred of suggestion by forumers to have Telpages improved from its origin, and even had them worked out several attempts to show the way or circumvent so bad effectiveness of Telpages searches from Telpages main homepage at least !

Happy New Year 2014 !

TELwax wrote:If you refer to original .TEL and proposed roadmap, it does include directory / subdirectory function .

(That is the ORIGINAL .tel, 2008 Website, there is no mention of anything else except these 2 uses and the global directory.)

BUT then please , do not try NOW or still to convince anyone that the problem (for TELnames or for Telnic) is the directory feature from original .tel.

(OF COURSE it is, over 100,000 initial registrations were based upon this promotion alone, and most of them have dropped because their Business / Individual .tel was not in a VALUABLE promoted directory.)

This attempt to rewrite history back is  .... definitively weird

(It is the ACTUAL history, the only rewrite is in rewriting YOUR mind's history!)

Again your previous attempt to rewrite history back is  .... definitively weird ...
Now, rather better to look ahead for new promises of year 2014 !   ;+)


(The FACT remains that .tel was intended to be something it did not end up being, MORE Registrants and SUCCESSFUL because TELNIC did not EVER do what Registrants purchased for TO BEGIN WITH.  When TELNIC NEVER DELIVERED .tel DIED as a REAL effort only to be peddled as a joke tld to F00LS with some other reason to use them in mind.  TELNIC LOST WHEN THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH ON THEIR MISSION AND PROMISES. TELNAMES has the ability to salvage .tel as it was intended, and if TODAY Telnames followed through on with how .tel was initially promoted, it would have MILLIONS of REAL registrants, and SUCCESS, not 22 months of consecutive declines and LAME directories with OLD .tel)

GoTel wrote:TELNIC LOST WHEN THEY DIDN'T FOLLOW THROUGH ON THEIR MISSION AND PROMISES. TELNAMES has the ability to salvage .tel as it was intended, and if TODAY Telnames followed through on with how .tel was initially promoted, it would have MILLIONS of REAL registrants, and SUCCESS, not 22 months of consecutive declines and LAME directories with OLD .tel)

mikeseaton wrote:

I wonder how many millions of Telnames .tels would now be registered if they offered it FREE (or maybe just free for the first year) ?

It's a business model that's enabled Facebook, Twitter etc to become multi-billion dollar businesses - but heck what do they know about internet success that Telnic (Telnames parent company) doesn't ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

TELwax wrote: To be honest, possibly the insane rendering  of TELpages since early times has been possilby rolled along for years so far because of the too numerous .TEL that were empty since early years (still today, many of them ) .
Therefore again not any responsability beared from the few .TELs  which were populated with multiple related subdirectories
(and subdirectories are still easy to discard when rendering search results, at least more easy than to reckon/justify that many .TEL are empty ).

GoTel wrote:They would still need a directory like facebook and twitter to locate other Telnames pages and create the "hive" of Telnames buzz.

mikeseaton wrote:

What really gets me about the missing Tel Global Directory is that Telnic claims to have already developed one on the Telnic site (http://telnic.org/tour-global-directory.html) BUT DOESN'T MENTION IT AT ALL on the Telnames site (http://www.telnames.com) !

Does logical consistency exist in the Telnic/Telnames mindset ?

http://MikeSeaton.tel

@gotel  wrote wrote:NEVER did either of them, nor would any SANE individual screw up the entire effort by mixing in the content of the pages or subpages into the main page results in the directory

mikeseaton wrote:The home page of http://www.dottel.net was very useful in providing a daily count of Total .Tel Registrations with the Telnames figure itemised.

Now that this is no longer available, my Net-Link Tel Search Engine can provide a figure for INDEXED (by Google) TELNAMES .TELS - just click
http://www.net-link.com/tel/search.asp?q=%22powered+by+telnames.com%22

old .tel and a handful of arrogant people using massive amounts of subdomains for a few bucks is what destroyed the entire .tel iniative. wrote:
Every attempt to use .tel for a website or a self-authorized directory has proven useless and destroyed the .tel purpose.

4444 wrote:In the beginning of the availability of .tel a lot of people have waited for improved tools to start developing .tel. These tools have never been delivered.