back to article Nominet vows to freeze wages and prices, boost donations, and be more open. For many members, it’s too little, too late

The board of .uk registry operator Nominet has offered a series of concessions to its members in an effort to win back their support in advance of an extraordinary meeting that could see most of them fired. In a message on Nominet’s website, the board on Tuesday said it would freeze director pay as well as .uk domain prices …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So long, farewell

    auf Wiedersehen, goodbye.

    1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

      Re: So long, farewell

      auf Wiedersehen

      Do you really wish to see them again?

      goodbye riddance


    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: So long, farewell

      No, not walk away scotfree, there needs to be recovery of all the misdirected funds, return of all unwarrented bonuses and criminal charges placed against those that subverted what should have been a community benefit.

      The UK has lots of these kind of managers having fabulous pay and pensions paid for by people who do not get any say in how much they redirect from the core business, this is a good place to start changing the idea that managing other people's money comes without competent and proactive oversight.

      There needs to be laws that limit what charity management can do without all the people funding the organisation being involved and that includes turning the clock back to before the changes and recovering redirected money back to the organisation. If this means bad managers who gamble with funds not their own end up loosing their homes then this is also what happens with companies.

      There needs to be a fair balance of power against responcibility and in the UK at least there is rarely any responcibility just jobs for the boys and keep whatever you have grabbed.

  2. msknight

    In other news...

    Pigs with nose deep in trough, offer the smallest of crackling to be allowed to stay....

  3. Chris G

    Excellent article

    The article ought to be evidence in a law suit to revover the misspent funds from Nominet during Haworth's tenure and from all three of the board who oversaw the efforts.

    Just looking at the list of U turns they are allegedly wiling to make demonstrates that they know they are in the wrong. Time for the pitchforks, torches and the tar and feathers

    1. Ben Tasker

      Re: Excellent article

      > Just looking at the list of U turns they are allegedly wiling to make demonstrates that they know they are in the wrong.

      Interesting isn't it. They've moved from "nah, we're fine mate" to trying to make an offering, but - in effect - generating a list of some of the things they should already have been doing.

      Does seem fairly obvious, too, that they're likely to use it to "buy" survival so that they can change the rules further to prevent another similar uprising in future

    2. Jamie Jones Silver badge
      Thumb Up

      Re: Excellent article

      I agree. Like with the .org fiasco, brilliant reporting here from Kieren.

    3. Imhotep

      Re: Excellent article

      I have to second that. Mr McCarthy's reporting and writing are always stellar. I wish that it was more available to the 'general public', who are generally being poorly served in all things technical.

  4. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    They only had one thing to do...

    Manage a system to support the sale of domain names for as low a cost as possible. Where is the need for marketing and "growth"?

    I believe in the free market (etc), but things like this should be 100% not for profit - a lot of people and micro businesses use them, and they don't have "spare" cash to line the pockets of egotistical megalomaniacs who what to appear "successful" in developing sectors (autonomous vehicles, IoT, ...).

    1. Lon24

      Re: They only had one thing to do...

      Just been listening to BBC Radio 4's reading of the Robert Maxwell debacle. How he borrowed from his company's pension fund to prop-up his grandiose but failing commercial ventures. Parallels with Russell et al using and abusing the uk domain space, its registrars and domain holders to finance their failing commercial ventures and their pay packets.

      Sure if they had been a roaring success (and it would be natural to sell Nominet's IP in registry management to an exploding market) then payback to subsidise the uk domain system would have been welcome. But they failed at that - a bit like Trump failing to make a casino profitable and then awarding himself a massive pay rise. The mind boggles. Nominet's registrars do business in the real commercial world. If we make a commercial mistake we suffer. It hits our pay packets and if we did as badly as Russell - our careers.

      I knew things were not right but not this wrong. If, as a member, I didn't know - what does this say of the board's responsibility to its members? They have failed. Their denial of responsibility makes it worse. Even worse is seeing them in a hole digging hard.

      Are you listening Russell et al?

      A Nominet Member

      1. xeroks

        Re: They only had one thing to do...

        if any of those ventures had gone right, do you really believe the domain registration side would have benefitted? Or that the charitable donations would increase?

        The only beneficiaries would have been the people on the board of that wing - ie the same old faces. You can bet the the subsidiary would end up claving off via a management buy out - to the same board members, no doubt.

        1. cipnt

          Re: They only had one thing to do...


          Directors' salaries and bonuses increased every year despite those failed ventures.

          Imagine the performance bonuses they would have demanded if any profits came out of those side businesses.

    2. cipnt

      Re: They only had one thing to do...

      Any natural monopoly should be either set up as a non-profit or under extreme regulation. Ideally both.

      Think Openreach, National Grid, Network Rail, the local water supply companies.

      Nominet has no oversight at all and was also slowly trying to push out members from any decision making.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: They only had one thing to do...

        " a non-profit or under extreme regulation"

        Wrong choice of logical operator. Paying staff massive amounts does not count as a profit in company law so the staff can profit in an personal sense. It needs to be a regulated non-profit.

        1. sgp

          Re: They only had one thing to do...

          Yes, and other perks such as 50 days off per year..

    3. Ralph Online

      Re: They only had one thing to do...

      Plus drive adoption of technical innovation in UK internet... like DNSSEC..

      Oh wait..

  5. Fred Dibnah


    So they awarded themselves double-digit pay rises, and now they are 'offering' not to increase their pay further. I'm sure they think that looks like a concession, but from where I'm looking it looks very different.

    1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: Pay for failure.

      So they awarded themselves double-digit pay rises, and now they are 'offering' not to increase their pay further.

      So two of the board members, or 2/3rds of the commercial SPV directors were from a finance background, specialising in M&A. Yet most of Nominet's 'diversification' efforts failed miserably, costing money and wasting resources.

      So why should failure be rewarded, and why shouldn't the membership fire the feckers*, and return Nominet to what it should be, ie managing the UK registry. Especially given-

      Many members would be opposed to these forays into commercial markets, especially since they were paying for them.

      In more ways than one given Nominet members may also be offering services in that same space, even if it's just registry services. Nominet would have almost certainly been bidding against it's members for new TLD registry/registrar services, but faced cost increases to pay for Nominet lowballing it's own bids.

      *As in terminate with extreme prejudice, not allow resignations and leave Nominet on the hook for any fat pension payouts.

    2. cipnt

      Re: Pay

      This is what it would have been funny if it wasn't so tragic: in times like these CEOs and other high paid directors take a voluntary pay cut or give up their bonuses in solidarity. These guys only think a pay freeze is in order and only after threatened with a p45.

      Good riddance!

    3. General Purpose

      Re: Pay

      ... and they're offering to stop doing the things they said justified and paid for those high salaries.

    4. Blane Bramble

      Re: Pay

      "Oh shit guys, we got caught with our hands in the till, what do we do?"

      "I've got an idea, let's promise to be good for 2 years, after that the proles will have forgotten and we can carry on".

      "Great idea, let's do it".

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Nominet vows to freeze wages and prices, boost donations, and be more open.

    but this ABSOLUTELY requires the CURRENT Board to supervise and monitor this process for years to come! :D

  7. don't you hate it when you lose your account


    We accept we're crap, so everyone should just forget the whole thing and stop being so mean to us.

    Sums it up

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    specializes in mergers and acquisitions

    in plain English: fires and re-hires.

  9. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    It seems that they need far more than simply replacing the board. They need to change the articles of association to limit the ability to do anything outside run a registry without a vote by the majority of the membership, not just the turnout. They also need to ensure that the board publishes a full account of what it does.

    A quick search shows that a Nominet Charitable Trust is a registered charity but I can find no such registration for this alleged non-profit itself. If it's really a non-profit then maybe the entire outfit should be registered so that the whole of its activities come under the scrutiny of the Charity Commissioners.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Some digging...

      There is a "Private Limited Company by guarantee without share capital use of 'Limited' exemption", Social Tech Trust showing on Companies House. This was know as Nominet Charitable Foundation until May 2018, when "Nominet Trust" became "Social Tech Trust" - see

      Coincident with the change of name, they replaced the Articles of Association - pdf available as a linked document (16 Jul 2018) from

      There is also a charity with the same name (Social Tech Trust) -

      1. Jonathan Richards 1

        Re: Some digging...

        This is a repost of something I posted on 6 Oct to an earlier article about Nominet companies:

        The active personal-corporate relationships within and between the five companies with 'Nominet' in their names are captured in a graph here, (PDF). The Graphviz source code is alongside it, here (plain text).

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Nominet has yet to set a date for the EGM.

    what if they delay it indefinitely? And if they do, can they be FORCED to set a realistic date within a couple of months, rather than something 2 - 3 years down the line because pandemic, etc.?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Nominet has yet to set a date for the EGM.

      They can be forced, although it would require legal action. They are compelled under the companies act to call the EGM as the required threshold of members requesting it was passed.

    2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

      Re: Nominet has yet to set a date for the EGM.

      One of the previous stories said that they had to hold the EGM within a certain period of time - something like 90 days from when the required threshold of signatures was reached, perhaps?

      1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

        Re: Nominet has yet to set a date for the EGM.

        49 Days (seven weeks) if I recall correctly.

  11. Ben Tasker


    I missed picking up on it in the earlier articles, but actually there's a beautiful irony in the fact that the campaign is being run under a .uk, given it was Nominet's mismanagement that led to .uk's being forced upon the market.

    Undone by a symbol of their own hubris, lovely.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Beautiful

      Personally i'd have picked a domain name like .net that nominet couldn't start fiddling with.

      You know, just in case.

  12. N2

    Once they're all fired

    Will the prices for .uk domains go down?

    1. R Soul Silver badge

      Re: Once they're all fired

      Of course not. If Nominet cuts its prices - a very, very big if - the registrars who sell names to the public are highly unlikely to pass along that reduction. They'll pocket the difference as extra profit for themselves. That's what usually happens whenever a registry cuts prices.

      The biggest registrars have high volume, low margin business models. A few pennies off the registration fees they pay to a registry will go straight to their bottom line.

      Besides, if Nominet cut their fee by say £1 a name (a ~ 25% reduction), who's really going to notice if a registrar sells .uk names for £9 a year instead of £10 (a ~10% reduction)? Assuming they reduce their prices to reflect the lower wholesale price.

      1. Lon24

        Re: Once they're all fired

        That's a little unfair. We put up prices in line with Nominet. We will pass any reduction on. It's up to the domain holder to choose an ethical provider who will do that. Again a reminder that you will find them in that list at the bottom of the webpage.

        But note because we get them for £4.68 (£3.90+vat) isn't the only cost. DNS management, support etc make up most of the difference. Even rendering an invoice and proceeds comes at a cost. Margins are pretty close to zero for most of us.

        A Nominet Member

  13. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    It is time to GROUT !

    Get Rid Of Useless Twats.

    And slap a lawsuit for criminal mismanagement of a non-profit with a public remit. There has to be something to stick on those bastards to get them to jail.

    1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

      Re: It is time to GROUT !

      That will only cost the tax payer more, far better to strip them of their ill gotten gains (remove all their assets until they only have debts left).

  14. s. pam Silver badge
    Thumb Down


    way too little way too late way too much bullshit has happened.

    time to close the doors

  15. Lucien Taylor

    Great article, beware any offers from this board

    The concessions will not be granted - Nominet are masters of gaming the members. The members now have a one-shot chance to get rid of them and rebuild the pre-profiteering Nominet. It doesn’t matter what the executives say, or think, or intend to do, this is a numbers game.

  16. Greybearded old scrote Silver badge

    Not uncommon

    How many other examples of this sort of shenanigans can we think of? Mozilla of course. As I recall, the Co-op Bank was nearly run into the ground by the CEO trying to run it as a business-for-profit.

    I'm thinking non profit organisations need to find good organisers who didn't learn it in business school. They tend to get confused. (Insert Mediocre But Arrogant joke here.)

    1. James Anderson

      Re: Not uncommon

      Given that most mergers and/or acquisitions end up in failure. The job of merger and acquisition specialists is to sucker clients into believing otherwise so they can collect fat fees.

      To quote Warren Buffet on the industry “Never ask a barber if you need a haircut”.

  17. Kane

    nominet dot fail

    Apparently, it's a thing;

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: nominet dot fail

      That site's a fail. No content gets through NoScript.

  18. djberriman

    It seems this is quite a simple business, needing next to no marketing by nominet themselves, not exactly requiring a lot of staff, nor management requiring large salaries, its a registrar, that's it, one that has never coincidently enforced its own rules on things like

    Nominet does randomly decide to throw its weight around and threaten you with removing your domain simply because its registered to a person and has a holding page as its no longer in use but has a single link to a business. This happened to me and I was forced to remove the link.

    I once complained about a domain and was told

    "Although the domain name is being used for business purposes, the domain name Registrant is an Individual, and so we would say that the details are correct. A domain name can be registered to somebody or something other than the end user."

    Which rather contradicts what happened to me re the link.

    If you report one that is actively clearly very obviously fraudulent (such as a clone of a bank site using a domain that has just been registered) they tell you to inform the police as its not their problem and they won't do anything without a court order.

  19. Licenced_Radio_Nerd

    Caught out by the .uk money grab.

    I have held a specific domain-name as a .com, .net and since the late 90s. So when the great .uk debacle happened, I was automatically given the equivalent to my registration. All fine and dandy until it was time to pay for it. I paid for 1 year, then let it lapse, as I did not want to line Nominet's pockets. This has turned out to be a mistake. Early December 2020 I find someone has registered my previous .uk domain name and has started a business offering computer repairs. All well and good, except the individual concerned failed to check if the name he had thought of had been previously used. It is in fact a registered Trade Mark for computer services, and I own it.

    Unable to find the 3rd party's address (remember the WHOIS issue?!), I had to open a DRS complaint with Nominet. Only then was I able to send a Letter of Claim (known as a Cease and Desist in the USA) to the 3rd party. He has ignored me and failed to take part in the Nominet DRS process. Their mediator would not accept that it was Nominet's flawed plans to sell-off the .uk space that has led to, and facilitated Trade Mark infringement. Their cop-out: it is a matter for the courts. The DRS mediation process has now drawn to a close as the 3rd party refused to engage. I can pay £750 +VAT to one of their independent "advisors" to rule on the domain name if I want it transferred back to myself. If I had £750 +VAT kicking around, I can think of more important things to spend it on!

    So thanks to Nominet, I have no recourse to common law without spending money on lawyers to file a case with the courts; or I have to pay their fees to stop this person from infringing my Trade Mark. In the meantime, I am tackling this from another angle: I have been raising Trade Mark infringement complaints with Instagram, Twitter, and the website's hosting company. I have to tip my hat to Instagram - they were the first to bite and close the infringing account. I have had to email Twitter again, and I am still waiting for them to wake-up; and I am waiting on to clobber the website. Assuming all goes to plan, I can only hope the 3rd party gets the message and drops the domain name. I will then have to scramble to try and register it again to stop this from happening in the future. I have also had to pay to cover the variant - just in case. This is all rather annoying, as it gets rather costly, both in money spent on domain renewals, and one's time trying to defend one's IP!

    All of this could have been avoided if Nominet had not been so greedy in selling off the .uk namespace. Of course, it could have also given people their equivalent .uk domain name for free, for life; or at least as long as you maintained the equivalent.

    1. Peter2 Silver badge

      Re: Caught out by the .uk money grab.

      The entire point of the proliferation of useless TLD's is to force every business to own a dozen useless domain names. It is basically just a barely legal form of extortion; it's rather obvious that if they had of given everybody a free .uk domain name then they'd only make as much from it as they would have done from new registrations.

      A captive market of every registered business being forced to register another domain forces huge numbers of people to double the money they are paying Nominet.

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Irrelevant in the longer term?

    Surely in a couple of years the options will be .scot, .wales, .ie and whatever they come up with for the bit that's left.

    1. rg287

      Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

      and whatever they come up with for the bit that's left.

      "bit" as in singular? Rather wishful thinking!

      Surely by that point we'll be well into the realms of .mercia, .wessex, .essex, .sussex, .kent, .(east)anglia .northumbria and .kernow (or .dumnonia depending which era you want to hail from)... by which time the Isle of Wight will probably have declared independence too.

      1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

        Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

        Don't forget .london.

        1. Dave559 Silver badge

          Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

          "Don't forget .london."

          Ah, the obvious solution for the remnants of Englandshire is then for them to be registered under *, which would also (sadly) probably better reflect the workings and focus of England's economy…?

        2. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

          Don't forget .london
          Why not? Everyone else has!

      2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

        "by which time the Isle of Wight will probably have declared independence too."


      3. nematoad
        Thumb Up

        Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

        " which time the Isle of Wight will probably have declared independence too."

        And not before time. My first vote in a general election was for the Vectis Independence Party in 1970 and I'm still waiting. Being an island means that things are different here and it also means that we are literally on the fringes of the country and are easy to overlook.

        So bring it on. I don't think that Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man etc. are suffering from being detached both physically and politically from the mainland.

        1. David 132 Silver badge

          Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

          I believe the multi-talented Lauri Say recorded a song on the subject of UDI For The Isle of Wight back in the late 60s... pretty sure it was on the rather rare “Songs for Singing Islanders” disc along with “Cowes Week”, “The Westlabd SRN Super Noiseless Hovercraft” and “It’s The Isle of Wight For Me”. Can anyone with a better memory than I confirm that it was Lauri? I have them all as MP3s but am currently without power due to a winter storm, and contemplating a 3-day weekend of shivering pre-industrial existence...

    2. H in The Hague

      Re: Irrelevant in the longer term?

      "Surely in a couple of years the options will be .scot, .wales, .ie and whatever they come up with for the bit that's left."

      Already happened, see e.g.:

      As an aside: I find it quite incomprehensible how Mr Johnson, as self-appointed Minister for the Union, seems to have a knack for playing into the hands of the SNP. I just can't decide if that's a carefully considered policy, or incompetent buffoonery.

  21. N2

    Pigs in the trough

    in 2015 a domain registration renewal cost £4.78 for two years, now its nearly £9.00 a year - prices include VAT

    These people need a public flogging followed by jail, not a reprieve.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pigs in the trough

      Depends where you go - mine are £6.35 a year (inc).

      1. DJV Silver badge

        Re: Pigs in the trough

        Please tell us from where?

        1. Jamie Jones Silver badge

          Re: Pigs in the trough

          Try this:

  22. Justin Clements

    Nominet should never have existed

    I was there at the beginning of this, quite vocal at the time that Nominet should never have existed. Everyone knew that at it's creation it was a money grab by a second rate lecturer who happened to have discovered he was sitting on a pot of gold.

    The idea that it was a membership organisation was laughable at the time, everyone knew that control of .uk had been passed to a private company operating under the guise of a not for profit membership led organisation. Members were seen from the start as a problem.

    Naming Committee members like Demon had even offered to the run the entire registry for free, in part because it would have been a coup, but also because domains were merely a line in a database that didn't need to cost £7.50 or whatever it was at the time. A line in a database. Name serving duties could be carried out by any one of a 100 ISPs at that point. Again, just a line in a database on a machine that already was acting as a name server.

    Instead, Nominet was pushed down everyone's throat, a plush new office in the Oxfordshire countryside, doubles for everyone. Guaranteed salaries from a money making machine.

    It is long overdue for Nominet not to listen to it's members, but to be swallowed up by the DTI (or whatever it's been renamed to this week), which is where it should have been run from 25 years ago.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Nominet should never have existed

      The sort of mickey-mouse registry and DNS setup you describe might well have been fine for the 1990s. But not today.

      Ever since the dotcom boom DNS service for a major TLD is more than "a line in a database" - a lotmore. DDoS attack mitigations, anycasting, 24x7 operations, capacity for zillions of queries per second, no downtime, etc. The same goes for running a major registry - something else that has to offer 100% uptime. And let's not ignore all the other essential and expensive running costs: finance systems, tech support, interaction with law enforcement, dispute handling, community engagement, etc. If a registry for .uk started out the way you described, it would have had to morph into something that has the level of infrastructure seen at Nominet or any of the other big registries.

      You're right Nominet has over-paid for fancy offices. And over-paid even more for executive salaries and bonuses to people that didn't deserve them. Something should be done about that. If/when those excesses are put right, it's still going to cost at least a few million a year to keep the lights on and make sure .uk queries get answered. There's no going back to "one line in a database".

      Having the government run .uk is beyond silly. They can barely run a bath. Look at the government-run registries. DVLA or Companies House or the Passport Office are hardly beacons of competence or efficiency. Let's not forget that government-run registries also squander millions and reward failure with pay rises and bonuses. They're far less accountable to their customers or the public too. In principle, Nominet's members are able to take back control. There would be no chance of that if the government ran the .uk registry.

      1. Justin Clements

        Re: Nominet should never have existed

        What are you talking about? You have just spouted so much nonsense I don't even know where to start. So I'm not going to.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Nominet should never have existed

          It's not much more nonsense than your "a domain is a line in a database" to be fair.

          It also requires root name servers for the TLD.

          It requires an API for registration.

          To avoid abuse these days it requires some sort of verification of data.

          These things cost, so it also requires some sort of billing platform.

          All of this needs to be offered in a neutral fashion to the up stream registration companies.

    2. Spanners Silver badge

      Re: Nominet should never have existed

      but to be swallowed up by the DTI (or whatever it's been renamed to this week)

      Although a reasonable idea, this would have currently got it run by our current government. If we think that Nominet is corrupt at present, this is tiny in comparison to what is being done with public money at present.

      How do we know that this is not going to continue? Instead of a few hundred grand here and the odd million there, it wouldn't turn into something that spaffed hundreds of millions here and billions there as is being done with money that is supposed to be for healthcare etc.

  23. CrackedNoggin Bronze badge

    Major B******t Artists

    How could this be? Aren't the board members tech 'literate' MBA's?

  24. Ozzard

    "Good, robust debate" - how?

    From the article:

    "I welcome a good, robust debate on all these points, conducted in the right way."

    ... without any way of conducting the debate because, of course, the members' forum is no longer available. I wonder what the Chairman believes "the right way" to be?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "Good, robust debate" - how?

      This good robust debate is this comments section. Job done. Bring on the EGM.

    2. nematoad

      Re: "Good, robust debate" - how?

      " I wonder what the Chairman believes "the right way" to be?"

      "My way." As is shown by his actions.

      "Come in Howarth, your time is up!"

  25. Stuart Moore

    Tell your Domain Registrar

    I was delighted to find that my preferred domain registrar ( have already signed, and sent them an email to say so. If your registrar has - congratulate them, will help them fight any pushback internally. If they haven't - email to ask why not, and why you shouldn't move to one that has?

  26. Dan 55 Silver badge

    Carry on grifting

    Seems odd that Nominet are suddenly having a conscience when everyone else who can is part of the chumocracy. They should just be shameless and blazen it out with the rest of them, that way they'd be untouchable.

    1. A.P. Veening Silver badge

      Re: Carry on grifting

      that way they'd be untouchable.

      They just discovered they aren't.

  27. keith_w

    Not a Nominet registree, but I have to wonder who thought it was a good idea to hire 2 M&A people to run an internet registry?

    1. dieseltaylor

      Possibly in a similar way that Wthe Which? Board was headed by the ex-head of P&G Europe and the Chairman of the Trustees worked in marketing specialising in the FMCG sector. The two people added to the Board from Unilever plc plus other industries shows how important it is that charities need proper control from senior businessmen who will obviously identify with the average subscrber and the aims of a consumer charity.

  28. Fruit and Nutcase Silver badge


    Bedazzled (1967). The Devil - Peter Cook.

    Bedazzled (2000). The Devil - Liz Hurley.

    Bedazzled (2021). The Devil - Guess Who

    The Devil : Paragraph one states that I, the Devil, a not-for-profit cooperation, with offices in Purgatory, Hell, and Los AngelesOxford, will give you seven wishes*...

    Former(?) Devil Liz Hurley modelling her wardrobe for when hell freezes over... (or Nominet, under the current board change their ways and keep to their word)

    Caution: NSFW

    * The message from the Nominet Board contains... 7 initiatives

  29. Imhotep

    It's What They Do

    If the Nominet board and leaders are allowed to stay, I guarantee their first order of business will be putting changes in place to prevent any future attempts to oust them.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like