Question for NickM

[218]

This is absurd, why this thourough investigation Drewbert, how have you been wronged?

[Cartoonz]

duhh.

[Drewbert]

You have no problem with prolific bulk WHOIS spammers, 218?

There was a big outcry within the domain industry when this was going on, and eNom didn't lift a finger to stop it -which probably caused them to lose a number of clients - but hey, when you're making money because you have a rabid spammer selling renewals for you, who needs ethical clients, huh?

[218]

First of all I've come to learn to deal with SPAM in general. Second of all I've never received any emails from the companies mentioned, and furthermore I've done business with NickM in the past and I've never seen a shredd of evidence to suggest he's unethical at all. And being a fellow domainer I would imagine if he was unethical I would have received some of his spam being that he has my email.

Originally posted by Drewbert
You have no problem with prolific bulk WHOIS spammers, 218?

There was a big outcry within the domain industry when this was going on, and eNom didn't lift a finger to stop it -which probably caused them to lose a number of clients - but hey, when you're making money because you have a rabid spammer selling renewals for you, who needs ethical clients, huh?

[safesys]

Frankly, if it wasn't for the fact nickm seemed perfectly happy to make a warning post about moniker without disclosing a clear conflict of interest/motivation and the crazy questioning of frattay22 at the start of this thread it would have been canned a while back.

But if this person is involved in or connected to domain slamming then that is a warning post of far greater value than anything moniker are doing by way of protecting their registrants (by requiring the monumental effort of sending a single email).

I can see a very clear reason why a company involved in domain slamming would be motivated to attack a registrar that works hard to prevent such nefarious activity.

The thing I don't see is a clear disconnect between nickm and a company involved in that.

[Nexus]

I was under the assumption that Drewbert wouldn't ask a question without having some measure of evidence. I put out the bits that made me question what was going on. Now, Drewbert has posted one message containing references to a DNRENEWAL.com, whose whois contains the name of one "Nick M." Also referenced is a "AAMAIL.com", whose whois contains references to the self-same "DotName Communications" Nick has claimed as the business he owns (as well as another reference to his brother).

The format of this e-mail matches a format I've seen before. Nick now implies, without actually denying or expounding on anything, that Drewbert might have manipulated the relevant contents of the mail. This is a bit irritatingly indirect and makes this whole thing go on and on...

In asking Nick to either say "No, I've never sent out these type of renewals under ANY company name" or "Yes, at one time I DID send out many rounds of electronic solicitations requesting that people renew/transfer through a service I ran." I'd like this just *settled* for petesake. Of course the third option is "I'm under no obligations to say anything that incriminates me." In the U.S., that's called "pleading the fifth."

I have NO doubt that Nick has good qualities to his character and business (as 218 vouches for). I'm less thrilled about the unreasonable evasiveness. If someone "outs" me on something, my quickest reaction is "yeah, who cares?" Drewbert asked ONE question at the start of this thread and since then, the question has been evaded repeatedly and misinterpreted as interest in other areas that have nothing to do with it.

Even those who are not responsible for the things they are asked, can be evasive, but I don't think it happens that often, and not with people as intelligent and clever as Nick.

To put a fine point on it, there are TWO answers to the question at issue in this thread. It's really black and white. The finer points, really, no one cares about.

A. "No, I've never sent out these type of renewals under ANY company name"

B. "Yes, at one time I DID send out many rounds of electronic solicitations requesting that people renew/transfer through a service I ran."

Nick can be an unapologetic spammer, and my curiosity would be finished. The answer would allow me for one, to have a better view of discussion occuring in the last couple of days. --And then I'll move on. I don't know if others will move on, but I have a feeling that it'll happen quicker without the tap dancing.

~ Nexus

[Domo Sapiens]

This thread reminds me a bit of the Movie "a few good Men"... when Jack Nickolson is been questioned by T Cruise at GTMO Bay ...

[Chad]

Kind of ironic that a spammer would have a problem having to send Moniker 1 email to transfer out a domain.

[218]

I keep telling Drewbert we could really use him over here on the dark side, but he insists on fighting for the people.

[ILikeInfo]

218, I'm glad to see you and your new avatar came prepared for this thread.

[218]

Originally posted by ILikeInfo
218, I'm glad to see you and your new avatar came prepared for this thread.

Yes lately it's good to be protected when entering warning threads...

And my eagles helmet does just that...

[apples4u]

I will back you on the Eagles comment everyone should wear a hard hat in the warning forum, even if you are not being accused of anything

[218]

I will spare the thread any more eagles comments, before nas and stocdoctor jump all over me...

[apples4u]

THIS JUST IN!!! VIA EMAIL!!!

info:

Get the Finest Rolex Watch Replica !

We only sell premium watches. There's no battery in these replicas just like the real ones since they charge themselves as you move. The second hand moves JUST like the real ones, too. These original watches sell in stores for thousands of dollars. We sell them for much less.

Wonder if I should buy from them so I can be in the same ball field as some in this thread.....

[mcahn]

I convinced myself that I was not going to make anymore comments about this "silly" issue but.....it is getting soooooo interesting now. Boy Nickm or who ever you are, you are really on the hot seat now.

For the 10th time, can you please call for your domain name to transfer from Moniker as you initially intented? After all this and the current beating you are receiving - just call for your domain name to transfer. I do not want it here any more and I do not want you as a customer. We try to work with people that have good intent, run honest businesses, value their domains and work with others in the domain community. Especially people that do not try to cause problems anc create conflict!

Please initiate a transfer - current status is still:

unlocking: yanagupta.com
542 Invalid old value for an attribute .

acking xfr: yanagupta.com
534 Domain name has not been flagged for transfer .

Even more ironic is that the domain is active:

status:ACTIVE nameserver:NS1.SEDOPARKING.COM nameserver:NS2.SEDOPARKING.COM created by:Moniker registration expiration date:2005-03-26 14:18:56.0 registrar:Moniker updated by:Moniker created date:2004-03-26 14:18:56.0 updated date:2005-01-18 05:40:50.0

What are you waiting for???