zlacker

>>t0bia_+(OP)
I am European and see another US news oriented site which ironically is not "minimalist" from my perspective. It is (to me) littered with US domestic concerns. My point is that _minimalist_ is highly subjective and a pretty huge promise from a site.

But kudos to the effort and the idea of keeping news small is a most noble cause

>>finnjo+G81
The problem is that .com is a de facto US TLD… as an American it doesn’t strike me as odd that a .com site is implicitly USA centric any more than a US news channel or US newspaper.

(Yes I know .us exists but it’s not as common as .com)

If it was newsminimalist.co.uk I don’t think anyone would really complain that it’s UK-specific news, right?

>>ninken+Js1
Obviously it doesn't strike you as odd as an American.

I'd say, .com is just the default. If you go location/topic specific, you go with another TLD.

To the 130 million (domainnamestat.com) domains, registered in the US, there are like 500 million domains, registered somewhere else. I couldn't find any numbers for how many of those are .com and how many aren't, but you cannot just ignore those. Just because most domains registered in the US are .com domains, doesn't make .com a US domain. That's a really egocentric point of view.

>>wohfab+4v1
> I'd say, .com is just the default

That means the exact same thing in this context. Genuinely interesting that you're not the only person who understood it a different way and suggested "default" instead. Neither would stand up to such pedantic scrutiny if you want to argue that one of them is wrong.

In such a short sentence about a topic that everyone here surely knows about, the words only reference the relevant aspect of the underlying information. You can't know if they have the wrong or right view without more information.