Much ado about .org

One important step in getting people to realize that .org is not the One True OpenID Provider is to fix the occasionally heard complaint that OpenID.net is terribly frustrating for end users. You can’t get an OpenID at OpenID.net. Furthermore, none of the links on the front page of openid.net take you to a place where you can get an OpenID. If you click on “wiki”, scroll down, and read carefully, you will eventually come to a link labeled “Organisations providing OpenID identifiers to users,” but it’s no wonder that some people don’t get there.

openid.net should have no reason to expect to retain its high search relevancy if it is not well maintained.

Please note that in the meantime the website went offline and replaced with a “Coming Soon!” message.

just testing

I agree with what ever my son says.

I agree with whatever Scott’s dad says!

Let’s look at this another way. It was actually useful for me to point at your site - you would never had asked me to do so otherwise. I got zero benefit from this. Remember, the original reason you asked me to do so was because people were ALREADY pointing at the .org rather than the .net - so the fact i redirected was to help you guys out. Had I not redirected I’d still be around the same place in Google - it wasn’t *because* i redirected that this happened.

I am the villian to you guys for no reason other than i bought a domain name. Then you invent an idea that, had you thought it was to be as big as it is, you would have bought all domain extensions for it (i have done that with some of my ideas) and then get annoyed at ME for not handing it over.

I live in the real world where i have two young kids and a living to make somehow. So i put on some Google ads - I am now the proud owner of $8.95 this month. You guys offered me $2k - at the same time you offered a $50k bounty for applications on it. You also can also charge $100,000 for platinum membership of OpenID. You guys are also travelling around the world promoting this stuff - my last trip was 4 years ago. You all seem pretty well off by my standards. So imagine where i lose the domain name, and openid disappears and then two years later i see someone else using the OpenID.org domain for some identity system that is not the openid we know and love - perhaps it just never took off. You can’t pretend to me that in that case someone hasn’t made a killing on the domain name. May not happen, but that’s technology.

You say “That’s stooping pretty low Steven.” - man, I did that BECAUSE i didn’t want people thinking my site WAS the real site. Honestly. It is to read that the openid.net is the REAL site and my is in no way affiliated.

And to say i am gleaning anything. I added mobile support, messaging, microformats and foaf (and some other stuff not yet released) to try and pull in some of the other thinking - it was to help the idea of OpenID… but you make it sound like these were already in place - as though i took some template of all the work people had done and dropped it in. I have spent countless hours working on this stuff (that’s why i have trouble sleeping) - a big deal when you work full time and have two kids.

Trust me when i say i am raking nothing in because of all this. Really. I’d getting sick of all this though - maybe OpenID and all these well off sponsors, members and individuals should think together and make an offer i can’t refuse. Not something I would have considered before, but i’m seriously getting frustrated by all this. But I can’t really win in this. Ask around for what people think openid.org is worth - as a domain name in general and then with the OpenID concept around it - in both cases it’s worth a lot as it’s a cool domain. People who didn’t even know there *was* and OpenID have said it’s a very snappy domain. So whatever i could sell it for I won’t get its real worth - i know that - espcecially if the foundation took it. But then if i sell it for a decent amount i’ll be the villain of the community - i may even make Time Magazine and new releases of SpiderMan will do away with the Green Goblin and have me in its place (which may be pretty cool for my kids). It’s not as though we were talking in millions of dollars - it’s all the companies that are benefitting from this technology that talk in those numbers.

I don’t know - anyone - please mail me at weblivz AT hotmail DOT com with your thoughts and ideas on this.

Boycotting openid Dot org sounds interesting. Any consumer app could easily reject *.openid dot org and display a notice about your app not trusting that domain.

Do you guys have any idea how petulant and childish you’re currently sounding?

OpenID is self defining as an open system, which means people are free to use it as they wish. Given that, why should Steven be penalised for essentially, being lucky?

Right now, it appears that you’re saying “Steven should give us the domain for something less than its worth because we want it”. We all want things we can’t have.

Owen, I don’t think anyone is trying to get something for less than it is worth. When we were talking to Steven many months ago, before OpenID had the popularity it is starting to see today, the amount of the offer was never raised as an issue. This is the first time that more money is bring brought up.

I’d certainly be interested in talking with Steven to understand what he’d be looking for.

“OpenID is an open, decentralized, free framework for user-centric digital identity.” from …openid.net

clearly a boycott of openid.org for authentication is ridiculous. and contrary to the intent of the project.

openid.org is NOW a public provider of openid. I could not find any guidelines, or suggested practices for providers to link to openid.net. Without formal direction, I might suggest providers are free to do as they may in presenting their openid services.

I will admit, however, that the openid.org site could better represent itself as simply a provider and catalyst for openid, and (with the help of openid.net providing direction) more accurately link to openid.net.

Ironically, openid.org seems like the better URL for the specification, and .net for a service provider. But it certainly is clear who owns which domain.

Does any organization own a trademark for openid?

Kveton says: We’ve debated in the past putting a “Get an OpenID here” button on the OpenID.net site but then the question comes up, which provider do you send them to? Do you give them a list and let them decide? How do users choose? Should they choose? Most importantly, does it even matter?

I’m just amazed that you say that. Surely the number one FAQ about OpenID is “How do I get one?”. There ought to be a prominent link on the front page to http://openid.net/wiki/index.php/OpenIDServers
Getting end users to use OpenID is far more important than treading on a few toes.

This whole debate reminds me of Jabber. Before Google, do you remember the mess of jabber.com, .org, .net. ? And how the list of public Jabber servers and clients was out of date and most of them didn’t work. Please don’t repeat their mistakes.

I’m a little late to the party on this one, but it seem emotionally charged enough that I can’t help but weigh in.

As I was part of the conversation back when we were working with Steven to make an offer.

FWIW, the offer was $2000 and we offered to work out a flight for Steven to come out to one of the conferences and be lauded as a helpful and active member of the OpenID community.

The discussion started slowly as Steven lives in the UK and had mush on his plate with the new member of his family. I remember one of the last conversations was when he said that his friends thought he could get a LOT more money from this. The history and nature of the OpenID community makes it particularly predisposed to a distaste for domain profiteering. On the other hand, I can see how a $50k bounty and the presence of a big corporation (Verisign) at the table and millions of OpenIDs in the world would make people think that there are big budgets and a potential pot of gold. The fact is, that there are not big budgets attached to many OpenID initiatives and the marketing group had a lot on their plate with the least resources (and often the least respect in a largely engineering world). Most of what a community like this offers, is a community full of good neighbors that want to help each other succeed. OpenID.org was (and remains) a really nice to have but not something that is going to have a lot of money thrown at it. That is why we offered welcoming arms into the community. I think we offered a “dues-free” membership to the trade org, or at least we were going to offer that before Steven stopped returning messages without offering a counter-proposal.

Steven, I think it is safe to say that your site is confusing to a new person, just reading about OpenID for the first time. You have every right (and duty) to put food on your family’s table and to be an entrepreneur and grab for a golden ring when you see one. I just don’t think that an OpenID.org domain is it. The minimum right thing to do (IMHO) is to give your site a good, solid “who we are” so that people coming only to your site would know think that OpenID was somehow close to 30 days old. Putting a message front and center would be even better.

I don’t know if Scott was proposing a technical “boycott” of OpenID.org as a provider of IDs or merely suggesting that people shouldn’t get their ID at that site. The former is probably extreme and not in the community spirit. The latter is fair enough as an opinion when you think someone in the community is not acting as a very good neighbor.

I think it is still possible to patch things up here without escalating this into an emotional fight. Forget what happened in the past, reset assumptions and start again with clear communication.

I must begin by mentioning that I do not know the details of past conversations between Kveton, Recordon, Livingstone, et al. What list did it take place on? Link to a web archive anyone?

That said, I stumbled across openid.org yesterday and must say that I was impressed. Steve is clearly attempting to take the `provider` down an interesting new path. Wasn’t this precisely the type of organic growth we’ve come to expect from an open, decentralized, free framework?

I’m glad Brad chimed in last, but not least, with calm nerves. His opinion is one of few to secure a spot in my trust bank. Let me expand on his commentary a bit.

> Who owns this?

> Nobody should own this. Nobody’s planning on making any money from this. The goal is
> to release every part of this under the most liberal licenses possible, so there’s no
> money or licensing or registering required to play. It benefits the community as a whole
> if something like this exists, and we’re all a part of the community. [1]

What’s in a name? Nothing according to OpenID. ’tis the beauty, no? Based on name alone, no entity shall have any more or less significance in terms of providing or consuming identities.

I can imagine the sinking feeling, Scott, when you see MyOpenid.com one step below Steve’s unworthy rank. However, now that openid.org no longer redirects, it will no longer appear in blog posts, forums, etc. Google will pick up on the decline and respond accordingly. Now that the distinction has been made, things will even out.

That is, of course, so long as Steve doesn’t attempt to represent his site as the official. The ball is really in your court Steve. Its neither a technical nor a moral challenge to do right by making a clear distinction between your service offering and the official OpenID project. One line, in bold, atop the page, describing clearly the situation would suffice. Is this too much to ask?

Now to what I see as a far greater problem than a temporary name issue (can’t wait until someone starts using openid.com….):

The tone of this blog post suggests that you’re angry. Is MyOpenid’s comparative google juice at the root of this? Is it that you feel deceived by Steve? Most importantly, is it appropriate for the foundation’s founder to be calling for a boycott over this issue? What a sad thing this would be for the entire OpenID movement if ego and former employer relationships were a bias in this political move. I feel I have both the right and the obligation as a part of the greater community to contest that you clarify that it is your /opinion/ to boycott use of openid.org and not to have it blacklisted on the consumption end. And quick, seeing as your voice has already influenced =damnian to hack up code that could be pushed to a popular CMS. [2]

..sigh.. It’s too bad Brad hasn’t maintained a greater political presence throughout the evolution of OpenID.

- - -

As for the OpenID.net page.. I have a suggestion for the marketing group currently working on the redesign (?). Currently, the landing page contains practically nothing for the end-user. The developers are not the ones who need their hands held throughout this transmigration process from archaic login to holy identity. The *hundreds of millions* of users need help. Thus, why wouldn’t the landing page focus specifically on them with a link “Monkeys this way ->” (kidding) in the top right corner for developers to access wikis, lists, specs, etc.

Lastly and in regards to your self-proclaimed “promoter” and “evangelist” status, Scott, why can’t I use my OpenID to sign this post?

[1] http://openid.net/
[2] http://blog.phpbb.cc/2007/07/20/boycott-openidorg/

Sorry for the confusion…It’s true, I am Brad Topliff

>Sorry for the confusion…It’s true, I am Brad Topliff

How wonderfully ironic that a confusion over identity has appeared on this OpenID debate! :)

Anyway, it seems the original post was written somewhat in anger. The .org site clearly links to .net as the community site and people might read this in different ways. I don’t know whether any private correspondence was initiated to notify the owner of the potential confusion or whether this public posting is the first. Maybe describing it as ‘openid specifications’ may be better.

I don’t see anything wrong with Steve trying to make his site THE openID site. I’m sure JanRain and Verisign are trying to do the same only with bigger budgets and lots of staff.

I’m looking into OpenID now, it looks like an interesting idea that could benefit quite a lot of people.

I said ‘angry’ because the post seemed quite emotionally charged and called for the boycott of openid.org (damnian’s site goes further and get’s a bit more personal).

It’s a shame that these sorts of politics are distracting from the idea of openid and energy is being expended on boycotting an openid provider and actually blocking/blacklisting an openid provider.

I’ve read your side of the story, and also the other side. It sounds like a simple misunderstanding in expectations and mis-communication. What one side sees as doing a favour to openid by pointing the domain to .net the other sees as trying to gain google juice.

I say, let’s try to work together, give others the benefit of the doubt (and try to assume good intentions rather than bad) and see if some deal can be done - after all, working together with benefit us all in the long run.

sorry. just re-read the post and it might sound a bit negative. i’m not trying to knock you or what you’ve done for openid. i’m just saying i’ve seen similar situations before that start from basic mis-understandings and get blown up out of all proportions.