Are domainers "cybersquatters"? At NameJet, a DNF member thinks so!

[DN BROKER]

Leave my "bananas" out of this, you have no idea what I went through for them, especially Focus' Banana, it was painful.

You really need a vacation! :lol:

 

[Gerry]

I watch a movie with my wife and now look what you kids have done!

Can't turn my back on you for a minute.

You all just can't play fair.

 

[thevirtual]

Does this individual focus on blatant tm domains or any domain with a hint of tm violation?

Seems like this would be very difficult to manage, I would assume this individual/s would not be able to keep up this scheme for long. However, Namejet has a longer payment period and more relaxed policy for payment defaults. I would be surprised if they took any action without proof of violation of terms of service etc...

Btw, I think this thread is in need of a catchy phrase to appropriately describe the accused. How about Anti-Domainer Proxy-bidding Cybersqueeler? Maybe just Cybersqueeler?

 

[DN BROKER]

Does this individual focus on blatant tm domains or any domain with a hint of tm violation?

Seems like this would be very difficult to manage, I would assume this individual/s would not be able to keep up this scheme for long. However, Namejet has a longer payment period and more relaxed policy for payment defaults. I would be surprised if they took any action without proof of violation of terms of service etc...

Btw, I think this thread is in need of a catchy phrase to appropriately describe the accused. How about Anti-Domainer Proxy-bidding Cybersqueeler? Maybe just Cybersqueeler?

I vote for Cybersqueeler :shy:

 

[GUA]

What about 'Manipulative Scumbag' ??

 

[DN BROKER]

What about 'Manipulative Scumbag' ??

Manipulative Scumbag SOLD

 

[BLazeD]

Well that was a waste of 5 pages reading. This thread should be closed.

 

[Theo]

Well that was a waste of 5 pages reading. This thread should be closed.

Hit that little "X" in your browser window and you're set.

Cybersqueeler sounds great

 

[Focus]

Leave my "bananas" out of this, you have no idea what I went through for them, especially Focus' Banana, it was painful.

Yeah JP said my banana was just a bit too big for him...it was worth that nice .ca domain though :eyebrows: Ohh the things we do for money...lmao

This seriously is ridiculous though.....I think Acro knows him NJ username and not his DNforum name quite honestly, which would make sense..

At least Acro does have the balls to post this. Now tell us his NJ handle before you get a severe banana treatment man! :angry:

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

Yeah JP said my banana was just a bit too big for him...

The proof is on the left, I took your banana 6 times! :faint:

 

[GUA]

Another thing that would be good to know is how did you get this email? Are you running a company he/she targetted? Is it simply companies? Cheers

 

[Ridge]

Thanks for the heads up Acro.

 

[Theo]

Another thing that would be good to know is how did you get this email? Are you running a company he/she targetted? Is it simply companies? Cheers

As I said earlier, I was contacted by a member here with the evidence I have posted who wishes to remain anonymous. The email was forwarded to them from a source related to one of the companies that were targeted. That email was signed with their full name and info. I am looking into confirming their NameJet username.

Please understand that this thread is about exposing the practice and confirming the "dirty games" that occur at a popular auction platform, NameJet - it's not about a person, it's about the inconsiderate practices that affect the domain industry.

 

[Focus]

The proof is on the left, I took your banana 6 times! :faint:

It was so great, I just had to go for a 7th...you wierdo! :uhoh: lmao

ound:

ok, this is getting wierd now I just got a doughnut for my banana

 

[Gerry]

Well that was a waste of 5 pages reading. This thread should be closed.

I disagree.

If anything, perhaps a sticky?

Simply go back to http://www.dnforum.com/post46-post-1628143.html

Domainers now know how your 'fellow' domainer screws over you. In a big way.

Just because my join date is an date of joining this forum, it is hardly my date of domain knowledge.

The ways domainers screw each other is vast. There is only "one of" a domain and when more than one person wants it there are countless ways to get it other than the one-on-one "may the best person win".

Oh yeah, there are more ways...

but while I sit here and watch the inauguration live streaming to my computer, I can only hope to remember the first words uttered by the new 44th president,

my fellow citizens.

How cool.

 

[slimpickins]

......and then? all that build up....... to no confession/explanation/exposure?!

 

[Theo]

A "confession" must come from the perpetrator. The exposure of the practice came from me.

 

[TheLegendaryJP]

And his username at NJ is ?

 

[slimpickins]

the "semi"-exposure came from you...... but, imho, unless it is followed-up with a user name that i can observe and judge on my own (or, ideally, comes forward and says it is me and for the reasons X,Y and/or Z) it is really only a suggestion of what MIGHT happen.... to be honest, I don't completely condemn the practice... just the implicit wording. Pretty deft touch actually, but the no-risk/tattle-tale/labeling of co-bidders combined effect is too much and completely unfair to other bidders that COULD win with legitimate development ideas guiding them.....

A "confession" must come from the perpetrator. The exposure of the practice came from me.

 

[Theo]

Since you don't "completely condemn the practice" I will assume that you support it. In which case, good luck. The document was presented and in due time any necessary action that might be taken by the bidding platform, NameJet, or others will happen. In the meantime, to act disappointed that no heads were presented on a plate and no names were named gives me the impression that you need to resort to some other form of entertainment. Some cases take a lot of observation and analysis; I don't reveal all my cards at once. The ball is in the offender's court.