.p2p or a _com ?

[Empirical1]

google,com

,    .

I think the underscore option as in google_com was the only one that might be backwards compatible.
(Otherwise I would have preferred a + or a !)

I'm passionate about the idea of brand_com's and just brand_ hence the poll but am happy to be proved wrong by the market because all I really want is to maximise my investment.

I'm also seeing PTS increasing while Namecoin is struggling. (Namecoin down 10% yesterday.) 
This is also a very good sign for the .p2p DAC in it's current form.

[sudo]

google,com

,    .

[Empirical1]

I will edit the poll to reflect the underscore option

Edit: Done

[cass]

If we want TLDs widely adapted etc.

BitShares.p2p
BitShares.own
BitShares.key

only traditional .TLDs working IMO

[toast]

It seems pointless to discuss something we have already concluded is not technically feasible.. backwards compatibility and playing nice with ICANN namespace are both critical

[JA]

other options are

/ is right beside . and dont need to hit shift key
= is an easier choice than +  as do not have to hit shift key( not sure this really matters?)

Bitshares/com
Bitshares=com

not every keyboard layout is the same ...

[soniq]

other options are

/ is right beside . and dont need to hit shift key
= is an easier choice than +  as do not have to hit shift key( not sure this really matters?)

Bitshares/com
Bitshares=com

[Empirical1]

1. BitShares DNS is launching with the TLD .p2p and may also offer TLD's like .own & .key

BitShares.p2p
Apple.own
Google.key

2. However it may also be technically possible to replace the dot '.' with something else like a '_' and then be able to offer the letters from ICANN domains such as _com too. Web addresses that end in just a _ will also be possible.

Apple_
Google_com
Wikipedia_org
Bitshares_p2p


Which of the two approaches do you prefer/you think would be more popular?