Geeze, i have the flu and a 4 year old who threw a temper today - so thought a Whisky and Entourage would have settled me, but ....
So i bought openid.org a couple of years back for an idea i sketched when working for Scottish Enterprise - it was to do with credit card transactions and fraud. I wanted to create an open system for managing your transactions.
The OpenID (the authentication protocols) got serious (they bought the .net, but not the .com or .org). There were quite a few initiatives around at the time (liberty and so on) and who was to know what would live and what would die. So, now, i am getting hassles for not giving the domain away.
Who would? It's a hugely useful domain name. I have been asked by a number of people to sell it and there are openid.co.uk, openid.pl and so on, which apparently are unaffiliated with the site. I seem to have made the mistake of attempting to popularise open id by putting a provider in there. Well, a free provider with some of my development ideas.
Now, let's think for a minute. There is no-one involved in Open ID who doesn't expect to make some cash from it (yes, i hear the market speak, but in reality everyone directly involved will do quite well if it is successful). That is fine by me.
So, let me ask this. Type openid."some extension" and you will find a host of sites around the world which are happily runing open id - http://openid.pl/ is but one example. Is this not a GOOD thing?
I'm really interested in hearing back about this from people - and hopefully some who aren't directly involved in OpenID.net :)
So i have a .org site, not charging, keeping it open and actually implementing what one would expect when you get there. Is there something inherently wrong in this?