The Laughable: DNJournal Calls Snapnames Reputable
So the "Duke" posts his usual
thread that does nothing for NP but promotes his own personal agenda and site.
Note that I use the term "thread" loosely because apparently we're not allowed to actually make it a "thread".
In response to the post someone (HeyNow) questions the contents and assumptions of this linked site. Comments ensue - several legitimate comments about the total B$ that is claiming the integrity of Snapnames... some back and forth on whether it's necessary or not to continue to point out that SnapNames has a sleazy reputation, that Adam DICKer bid on names at GoDaddy, that Name.com steals names from the clutches of free auctions and keeps them behind privacy.. etc etc...Oh, and GoDaddy, who had one of it's executives bidding on the marketplace (though nothing bad happened). I could also included Moniker who had someone access privacy information but that was a separate issue.
And then...
The thread is closed. I don't really have a problem with that. But why are all the posts deleted?
The suggestion? Start a new thread? Well it would have been easier to start with the existing discussion.
But here's the new Thread created for HeyNow because apparently we can't discuss the merits of DNJournal and its assumptions in a thread started by DNJournal in the Discussion section of a forum. I guess we've identified the new bad ass mod of NP, lol.
At least we don't upset Duke if we keep it here. Wouldn't want anyone to question him - I mean he's an icon. What's next? Anything bad said about Frank gets deleted(Oh yeah, we already used to do that)... maybe we should have a list of people who we can't talk bad about. I'm not sure which person caused the thread to be closed so I'll start with a list of who it could be:
Adam DICKer
Franky Schilling
The Duke of DNJournal
Anyone else I forget to mention? :great: At least I have a baselinen for the rules now.:bah:
So basically here's the subject.
DNJournal posts "Sales" information for people to use for INFORMATIONAL / EDUCATIONAL purposes only. They include numbers from such reputable sites as Snapnames (who had Shill bidding, a class action suit, legal issues related to said shill bidding in its history) with very little transparency in its current form, Namejet (who have other similar transparency issues) and Sedo. Hardly reputable.
None of this actually means anything about DNJournal (he reports what he reports - even if his logic is confoundingly stupid on some issues - Premium regges for example) other than the fact that he claims his source are REPUTABLE and not LAUGHABLY UNRELIABLE.
That's all.
Enjoy your time here, or you could go
here where generally everyone agrees that SnapNames is not reputable.