Hugh Irvine wrote:
> 
> Gary Oliver wrote:
> 
> > Thanks for poitning out I omitted the question. My question is the same
> > as that others have posed, viz what is wrong with allowing dictionary
> > words in .com.au subject to showing grounds for it.
> >
> 
> There is nothing *wrong* with dictionary words, except that the policy for
> .com.au specifically disallows them. This is what happens when *any* policy is
> enforced - there are always exceptions, hence my earlier remark.
> 
> > The problem that I see with the acn approach I touched on in an earlier
> > msg, viz many companies are in a structure (eg operations, financing,
> > holding etc) and so have several acns within their "group".
> >
> 
> Again - nothing says you only have to have *one* entry, especially if in this
> case an ASC database would always find the same target. Note that there are a
> great many examples of multiple domains already and no-one has a problem with
> this.
> 
> Hugh

Hi Hugh

Thanks for your reply concerning dictionary words. I am still trying to
understand why the policy is still in place and what it is supposed to
achieve given their acceptbility in other domains and the fact that
no-one has shown harm from the ones that have already been approved and
are in use (the two things not being the same).

Warm regards
Gary