I object to the creation of the 2nd level domain, bank.nz. , with the proposed moderation
policy for the following reasons:
I notice that one of the key reasons being used to try to justify this domain is an attempt
to reduce fraudulent on-line activity with respect to bank websites. As other feedback
indicates, this is likely to be completely ineffectual due to the nature of those people (in
general) who are caught out by such schemes. They are perhaps even more likely to
get caught if the banks make any public statements about this new domain (and their
use of it).
Another point that seems not to have been identified is that "Registered Banks" ie
financial institutions do not have a monopoly on the term "BANK", and so having a
moderated allocation policy that restricts even financial institutions to those "registered
with the Reserve Bank" even further limits the scope of this term.
What about "Blood Banks", and "Sperm Banks" to name two that spring to mind? Why
should these be excluded from the use of the domain if it is available? The safe and
secure storage of anything (physical or notional - such as
"knowledge") can be deemed to be in a "BANK" - so this application does not meet the
criteria of representing ...
"...an identifiable, significant community of interest; where 'significant' can mean either
quantitatively or qualitatively and the community of interest can be defined in a clear
If the moderation policy was relaxed to include any organisation that could demonstrate
a clear association with the more general interpretation of the term "Bank", then I would
not be against it. The issue of combating "bank fraud" is one that will be ever-present
and won't be solved in any way by the creation of this second level domain.