Why only one TLD?
There is a pretty good discussion here you might want to read first: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3652.0
The short answer is, if you look at what distinct TLDs actually do in real life, it's to establish different *rulesets* for how the namespace is managed. The fact that it can be used to avoid name collisions is a *secondary effect* and an artifact of how traditional DNS is structured. AAPL.com and AAPL.org aren't just avoiding a collision - AAPL.org is utilizing the fact that it won't get sued on the .org namespace, while it would on the .com namespace. Sure you can make it so that two TLDs use the same ruleset and are on the same blockchain, but then the only thing that it accomplishes is to make an aesthetic difference between typing "yoursite-org / yoursite-com" and "yoursite.org / yoursite.com". One blockchain is one namespace, no matter how you slice it or mask it.
So the idea is, future DNS derivatives who want to have different rulesets for their namespace, or who want to prove me wrong and show how people are just willing to avoid collisions (would you register "yourname.dac" if "yourname.p2p" is registered and popular? maybe) can launch a DNS derivative a la BTS X.
So .key might have a ruleset that fits the supply/demand characteristic of having a namespace for public keys better than domainshares.
.intr could be the first namespace to support a full character set.
There might be another blockchain that handles migrating .com, .org, etc onto a blockchain.Why .p2p?
Here were the good suggestion, IMO:
I don't want to do .bts or .dac because I find them slightly more awkward to say than .p2p, and I have a really strong aversion to people trying to sell me stuff (I know that's not what's happening, but I can't help but think .bts -> "BTS STANDS FOR BUY BITSHARES(tm)"). Furthermore I think .p2p does a much better job of marketing the advantages of a blockchain-based TLD than the others - people will instantly recognize what's up versus just thinking it's another TLD.
.key shouldn't be wasted on anything other than a namespace designed specifically for keys.
.we is risky because all two-letter TLDs are reserved by ICANN for country codes.
.blk is ok but worse than .p2p, fewer people know what a blockchain is
.dom is ok, maybe the first derivative with different namespace rules can grab it50,000,000 shares:
It's just aesthetics. Open to alternatives.