I've noted that the site crypto{dot}com is owned by an individual (probably since then start of the internet). I see that the last blog post was from 2013 so it doesn't seem to be used much - probably mostly for email.

Should we politely ask if we can use that domain?

Note that crypto{dot}net has been taken as well, but there's no site there.

This would be similar to superuser, stackoverflow and a few other (higher profile) sites.

PS. I'm using {dot} as I'm not sure if there aren't any crawlers actively looking for posts like this.

| |
  • $\begingroup$ PPS. I definitely should have become a domain squater when I was on university. I would have been rich by now, having a house and a boat... wait... I've got those :P $\endgroup$ – Maarten Bodewes Jun 14 '16 at 16:41
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ You have a house and a boat, but do you have a houseboat? If so, when is the Crypto.SE party on your houseboat? $\endgroup$ – mikeazo Jun 14 '16 at 17:10
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, bought a house next to the houseboats here. Although the Dutch may have a different idea on what a houseboat actually is :P $\endgroup$ – Maarten Bodewes Jun 14 '16 at 17:10
  • $\begingroup$ My guess is that the price will be far too high to be worthwhile. I don't suppose it hurts to ask except for the nearly-inevitable disappointment that we won't be able to follow through. $\endgroup$ – Jon Ericson Jun 14 '16 at 17:40
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't see a point in asking in the case of crypto com since Matt is actively using the domain and the domain is strongly linked to his name in the minds of cryptographers. crypto net might be possible, but like Jon, I doubt the price will be acceptable. $\endgroup$ – CodesInChaos Jun 15 '16 at 9:09
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I also though of crypto se (from Sweden) would have been cool. :/ $\endgroup$ – Biv Jun 15 '16 at 14:01
  • $\begingroup$ @CodesInChaos I'm not trying to tick off Matt even though I haven't met him:) I haven't looked at it much except to the last blog entry, and that was from some time ago. $\endgroup$ – Maarten Bodewes Jun 15 '16 at 14:06
  • $\begingroup$ I don't have an authoritative source to cite off-hand, but my impression has been that SE has been moving away from sites having individual domains for several years now. For example, askdifferent.com, arqade.com and seasonedadvice.com still exist, but only as redirects to the respective *.stackexchange.com subdomains. Except for the handful of grandfathered special cases (SOFU trilogy, MathOverflow, Ask Ubuntu and Stack Apps), I doubt we'll see new SE sites with their own primary domains any time soon. $\endgroup$ – Ilmari Karonen Jun 18 '16 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ ... And I suspect the only reason why MO and Ask Ubuntu still have their own domains is because SE is contractually obligated to keep them that way. $\endgroup$ – Ilmari Karonen Jun 18 '16 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ @IlmariKaronen This is probably the post you are refering to. It's from Jeff, which is probably "authoritative" enough. OK that's it then... No crypto site domain. Put this in an answer. $\endgroup$ – Maarten Bodewes Jun 19 '16 at 15:03

Unfortunately it seems that custom domain names outside stackexchange.com are out of the question in general. If somebody ever spots a policy change we could revisit this feature request, but not before.

| |
  • $\begingroup$ Jun 14 – today. Timewarp feeling… ;) Anyway, thanks for posting the answer pointing to Jeff’s point of view on these things. Nice how your answer proves that metas definitely have a lot of hidden secrets that turn out to be useful answers. +1 $\endgroup$ – e-sushi Jun 20 '16 at 10:36
  • $\begingroup$ Is that still the policy though? After the rebrand from SE->SO and all... $\endgroup$ – otus Jun 21 '16 at 12:47

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .