enom gives away free .info automatically?

[Anthony Ng]

And then how are you guys going to explain those 950,550 registrations by Sipence between Sep 27 and Oct 4??

http://www.webhosting.info/registrars/reports/total_domains/SIPENCE.COM

 

[Honan]

If memory serves me correct, I saw it, it was there. When Joe (anyweb) posted 131314.com as an example and was doubted by RealNames (now known as "trader"), I run a check on BOTH (131314.info with Afilias' whois), and I'm 99.99% sure it was there. They probably deleted that later.

Yep NS
I will kick in the other .01%
It was in afilias
My reckoning is that the 40 reg'd by enom for me has been reduced to 25 and that was one of the 15 that have been deleted

 

[Theo]

Yes that is what I have been trying to say
Some are in enom whois only, now!
Some are in afilias as well
Check CREATIVIDEAS.info
Thats me in afiliias
Surely you don't think I reg'd that at enom and paid for it !!
Even if I wanted it I could have got it for free somewhere else
I have another 24 examples that are in afilias
I think another DNF member gave me the dot com

I also posted about check bleufish.info It is in afilias.
To complicate matters, I have since sold bleufish.com

The .info is indeed registered, in your case.

However, it seems to me that someone else is playing a joke on your back, because of the 25 free .info mess!

Think: if Enom indeed had registered the .info of creativideas.com, wouldn't they use the SAME EXACT info that you use in the .COM ?

Well, they did not.

Compare those two - .com is first and .info follows - there are SEVERAL DIFFERENCEs, care to spot them? :-D

Edit...

 

[Anthony Ng]

Yep NS
I will kick in the other .01%

I was that sure because I remember seeing Joe's name on BOTH 131314.com and 131314.info (BEFORE I posted that response: #18). And I ALWAYS check .biz and .info's with their REGISTRY's whois.

 

[Theo]

It seems to me that Sipence.com is the culprit in this case; they appear to have MANUALLY registered selected domains. However, that does not explain the ghost WHOIS of Enom's as I described it in my previous posts.

If you really need answers, contact Sipence.com

 

[Honan]

Radi
There is a simple explantion to that
When someone gave me creativideas .com it was pushed to a 2nd enom account that I owned at the time
My info was obviously slightly different at that account
Then I pushed the name to my main enom account using keep the whois details.
BTW, would you mind editing out my whois details from your post?

 

[Anthony Ng]

It seems to me that Sipence.com is the culprit in this case; they appear to have MANUALLY registered selected domains. However, that does not explain the ghost WHOIS of Enom's as I described it in my previous posts.

If you really need answers, contact Sipence.com

May I cut and paste a response from [email protected], as reported by a trustworthy fellow mod elsewhere:

Hello,
The .info Registry and eNom has registered these names on your behalf. It is part of a promotional offer and you have not been charged for them. We will know more as to what the promo will be within a few weeks. Thanks, and sorry for the confusion.

May

 

[Theo]

May I cut and paste a response from [email protected], as reported by a trustworthy fellow mod elsewhere:

This is just bullcrap.

If that's the official reason, In my example above about corporal.info, in who's behalf was it registered?

I own the .net and .org with Enom - the fake WHOIS at Enom shows the .us holder's info for the .info.

Enom better straighten this out as it's getting to be one of the most stupid moves ever; on a par with Verisign's defaulting of .com/.net domains to their own search engine!

 

[actnow]

And then how are you guys going to explain those 950,550 registrations by Sipence between Sep 27 and Oct 4??
http://www.webhosting.info/registrars/reports/total_domains/SIPENCE.COM

Nameslave, you made my day.

I did not know this site existed.

It is already doing what I try to do manually.

Thank You!!!

 

[seeker]

act, thats one of the most famous .info sites!

I wonder though, still, could it be a system glitch showing so many regs for sipence?

 

[Anthony Ng]

actnow, you are most welcome.

And seeker, if you have read my post #67 above, you'll know that they (Sipence) actually admitted they did it.

 

[Theo]

Can you explain the ghost WHOIS info that I described in my example posts?

 

[Anthony Ng]

Can you explain the ghost WHOIS info that I described in my example posts?

To be honest, I think THEY (eNom) will have A LOT to explain.

 

[seeker]

if enom wanted to do as good, and for their good PR, (and logic) they would follow what I said in my post#60

still too weird.

I smell a disaster at work here...

 

[aww]

"official" reply from eNom support today:

This is part of a promotion that we are soon to roll out in the next week or so. Upper management has not yet released all the details to us - therefore we can't release much to you the end user or reseller, but they will soon be available to you at a very low price if you choose to take advantage of it.

So looks like they are planning to SELL us our own .info names. Blackmail is a word that comes to mind? Or am I taking this too harshly?

 

[Theo]

aww, how did you get that response?

Peronally, I have domains in other TLDs that I don't need the .info for, however Enom or Sipence or whoever registered those under my name will hear from my lawyer if they don't remove the contact info.

 

[aww]

I got that via eNom help center. I asked in a couple of my accounts and that was the most detailed answer yet.

Having sat on the other side at a number of support centers in the past, I can tell you there is plenty of stuff we were always cursing upper management about because they would make completely disconnected desisions without being in touch with the customers, while we had to deal with the fury from the support side. There was also plenty we knew but were not allowed to say. So be gentle on them I think they told me more than they should have so I am not going to release the person's name.

 

[Theo]

Ok I checked all of my domains and there are zero bogus .info domains, so I am relieved.

 

[Anthony Ng]

... so I am not going to release the person's name.

It's very nice of you, but all their support correspondence messages are actually well documented.

 

[Leading Names]

This whole Enom registering .infos on our behalf, without our permission or knowledge is totally unprofessional and has just landed me in big trouble.

I received a letter from solicitor a month or so back representing a major company asking me to delete a typo domain I had in my account, it was a .com domain and asked enom to delete the domain, which they did.

Great I thought, problem over. That was not the case though.

Although the typo domain was deleted it continued to show in my account (as always seems to happen after a transfer/deletion).

This morning I wake to a letter from the same solicitor saying that I had now registered the .info of the .com typo I had registered – obviously they are not happy.

I simply cannot believe Enom have the nerve to register domains on our behalf, using our Whois info and without our knowledge. Enom now officially sucks in my book They will be getting no more business from me.

- Rob