Who should do this vetting though?
The internet was built up with the idea of technical neutrality - everything else came on top. TLDs came later and were used to either describe the origin of a page or its intended(!) use.
That leads to the case that not only can a propaganda outlet mark itself as “info” - it’s actually historically correct to do so as it’s about what the host wants to communicate.
ICANN, the organisation behind the TLDs, actually always struggles with this btw. A more recent example was the decision which domain should be reserved for local name services. It took y long time (I think years overall) to get to:
.internal (edited, brainfart)
Who should do this vetting though? The internet was built up with the idea of technical neutrality - everything else came on top. TLDs came later and were used to either describe the origin of a page or its intended(!) use. That leads to the case that not only can a propaganda outlet mark itself as “info” - it’s actually historically correct to do so as it’s about what the host wants to communicate.
ICANN, the organisation behind the TLDs, actually always struggles with this btw. A more recent example was the decision which domain should be reserved for local name services. It took y long time (I think years overall) to get to: .internal (edited, brainfart)
Nope. It’s actually .internal, not .lan. https://www.icann.org/en/board-activities-and-meetings/materials/approved-resolutions-special-meeting-of-the-icann-board-29-07-2024-en#section2.a
Haha brainfart. Thought about lan domains…