The fact that it broke anything for anyone is a strong argument that it never should have been created in the first place, alongside .home and .corp.
They were aware of the issue, buried it in the report and reneged on their promise to keep it internal-only. That was the mitigating argument for allowing it despite the known existing usage. Google acted in bad faith and I'd need to see concrete proof to convince me otherwise.
Comments
The fact that it broke anything for anyone is a strong argument that it never should have been created in the first place, alongside .home and .corp.
They were aware of the issue, buried it in the report and reneged on their promise to keep it internal-only. That was the mitigating argument for allowing it despite the known existing usage. Google acted in bad faith and I'd need to see concrete proof to convince me otherwise.
I agree with you completely; I had this discussion 41 days ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29304536