Then there is no issue, because Slick would have all the needed documents to say the model was 18 when the stuff was shot, and would even pass a 2257 inspection... THINK!

Are you suggesting that Slick is a victim of content producers trying to sneak CP onto his site?

Without bothering to read your post, does your solution have anything to do with kissing someone's ass like you do all the time, you brown-nosed idiot?

no, what I'm saying is that Directnic can't determine if its cp or not.
What if based on 14 ids Directnic says its not cp and lets it go, and theres some cp somewhere on that site (not talking about Slick;s site here, but some other random site DN decides it needs to do an investigation)

All of a sudden you helped someone promoting cp.
BRAVO!
oops.

Then "they" (Slick) probably shouldn't have signed the contract agreeing to have it done this way.

Peaches, that is a good question, and I can only restate how I have handled this kind of thing in the past... by taking the complaint in stride, passing along the information and complaint to the site owner, and let him/her/them regulate themselves... if the content is illegal then they should pull it, but it IS after all, their responsiblity... It is OUR responsiblity as a registrar to field the complaint and advise the business owner of it...

There is a ton of content that is featured by clients of mine and others that doesn't hoist my mast, and there is a ton of content, as we all know, that features young LOOKING models with pigtails and braces... Monitoring the content, or verifying the models ages absolutely DOES NOT fall into the purview of a registrar... handling the privacy and protection of our clients DOES!

Probably, we're all learning our lesson here, aren't we ?
I hope everyone shits on the signed contracts, and moves on.
Everyone will be happy this way.

Well for you to not do business with them you sure are trying to stickup for them, I can post anyone I want I also dont like how godaddy does business but i LOVE how www.moniker.com does.

So whos fake nick are you? Oh ya i cna take 2 quesses and one will be right, GET A LIFE and get out of my thread, oh and THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENTS

Yeah, I'm going now to paint my house pink and tell the HOA to fuck themselves because no law says I can't paint my house pink - only the contract I signed with the HOA.

Hell, there's no law that says my vet's not responsible if my dog dies on the operating table but the contract I signed said he's not. Fuck him too.

And I don't see a single law that says I have to pay my mortgage. They'll never see another dime out of ME!

They guy who's coming to fill my propane tank next week? I'm not paying him. There's no law written that says I have to pay to get my propane tank filled!!

I swear, sometimes I feel like I'm dealing with children here, not business people.

Chris, I have to say I disagree with you here. If you have a complaint in your hand about CP, giving the offender a chance to move their domains to another place and sneak away isn't a good idea. Do you honestly think that Slick would have done anything except move his domains to another registrar?

Nobody is suggesting that registrars need to check all the content on all the domains they have registered. Dirctnic was working from a complaint, not a moral high horse. No complaint, no issue. CP is a very serious subject, not like copyright violations or spam complaints. What would be good for handling spam (or a wayward member of a free host) isn't the same as when you have a valid complaint in your hand about models on a site.

It doesn't mean that the information hasn't ALSO been forwarded to the FBI, there is nothing to preclude that. I think Directnic took their responsiblity that is part of their ToS and did what they need to enforce their registration contract. We may not like the means because we are all riled up about 2257 inspections and whatnot, but that is that. Directnic didn't ask for a 2257 inspection, and they didn't shut Slick's business down. They just didn't provide him a simple way to slip away in a midnight move to an offshore registry to avoid the hassle.

Again, verifying all model ages of all models on all sites is not within hter purview of the registrar, but taking complaints about CP seriously and acting on them with the best interests of all parties (not just your domain holder) in mind is a very wise thing to do.

So there's nothing that says you can't object to it or complain about it is there? What's wrong with having a debate on the issue and hoping to make a change? Why do you want everyone to shutup, bend over and take it up the ass?

You've said a lot of stupid shit lately Peaches. You've basically inferred that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a Pedophile and supports Child Porn. That's usually the place someone goes when their arguments lack any real merit in the first place. Now you're calling anyone that doesn't agree with you "children." That's usually the place someone goes when their arguments lack any real merit in the first place. Do you see the pattern?

How does that relate to my post ?
WE got your point! We signed a contract that allows DN to fuck us in the ass.
Whats the next logical step ?
I'm sure you smart enough to figure it out, right ?

Yep, find a registrar that doesn't have that in their contract if you're going to have anything that's close to CP on your sites. Have you done that yet? So far, from what I've seen posted, that's in all the contracts.

Brujah, with due respect man, it is very difficult to discuss anything about legal on here because so many people seem ignorant of the basics of things like contract law, business law, and criminal law. They all run around like chickens with their heads cut off yelling "PRIVACY VIOlATION! YOU ARE NOT THE POLICE! NO 2257 CHECKS!" without even truly knowing what they are talking about.

A photo ID with only the image and the date of birth showing is not a privacy violation (it better not be, because that is how most content was delivered for years). I have content purchased in 96 or 97 with those exact types of documents attached. I sure hope they didn't violate privacy! Considering I wouldn't know the model name, address, or other information, I don't suspect their privacy got violated.

Issues of contract law, ToS, and registration agreements are for the lawyers to figure out in civil court. From my point of view, there is nothing in the Directnic agreement that seems to be an issue, and most if not all of the other registrars have similar clauses. Nobody can force Directnic (or anyone else) to offer registration services to illegal sites. When in doubt, and with complaint in hand, Directnic is within their contractual right to ask for verification of this to prove that their contract has not been violated.

I suspect that a sworn statement would have been enough to handle this. I suspect if Slick had picked up the phone first rather than heading directly to GFY, he might have found this out for himself.

Too much of what is in these threads is people with little understanding of the laws that govern such agreements peeing into the wind to fan the flames. At that point, Peaches is pretty much right to say "children". People need to understand more before they start randomly pissing on things.

No, the next step is finding a company that won't fuck you in the ass
even if its in their TOS.

and spare us with your bs CP talk because its been said a zillion times in this
thread that noone has any tolerance for CP.

The only way Directnic will "fuck you in the ass" is if you are running sites that look like they have CP or illegal material on them, and they get a complaint. I would much rather that they "fuck you in the ass" than allowing you to slip your domains to another registrar to avoid facing the issues.

Do yo have something you want to tell the class? You seem awfully protective of these CJ sites covered in CP I found through Slick's sites.

this thread fucking rules too bad i didnt get my spot of sigin here,.

You appear to have great tolerance for CP, because you would rather tell Directnic not to look, and just keep on providing domain services regardless of anything that get told, regardless of any complaint, etc.

You would have Slick slide his domains off to another registrar, and go on linking to some really horrible sites, for however long it takes the US government to getting around to checking his stuff.

Like it or not, that puts you on the same side as supporting CP or the trading of traffic with CP for profit. That ain't a really good place to sit.

If DN wanted to fuck Slick in the ass, they would have reported him to the authorities immediately.

And I'll keep bringing up CP since that was the orginal issue, Slick has admitted at least one of his trades was questionable at best, and even those against DN's decisions have admitted that the girls looked underage.

So....had DN reported him to the authorities, he'd still have to come up with the same info DN is asking for - probably after his lawyer posted bond.

If you don't want to host with DN, then don't do it. But they did EXACTLY what Slick said they could do AND they saved his ass by not reporting him.

You're so fucking lame. Seriously. You're only combat to all whats been said
is that we support CP.

For the record I don't even promote hardcore (besides webcams) and I don't
even have adult sites (maybe 1 which I dont use) with Directnic. All of them are mainstream.

Yet I don't agree with what they do. Actually with how they do it.

And I think I have more of a right to an opinion on this matter since I'm a customer for quite a few years and on the other part you're not even a customer. You're just kissing some old friends ass.

I'd say you've put at least 15 - 20 hours into directly answering each and every single little criticism of directnic over the last two days. Probably without sleeping. You're doing this for FREE Alex? You're either lying or dumber than I thought.

Peaches et al are simple kissasses. Mike and Co mock them at every opportunity, but because they hung out at Oprano she thinks she has some special connection with them. Kinda sad. Same for Sarettah, the Joe Leibermann of the boards, who feels very special because the conservatives like him. Gonzo, I don't know what his deal is. He's getting something out of it, for sure. Rawalex is the only one that mystifies me, he's smarter than this and considering it seems to be his mission in life right now to defend dnic to the death and beyond, he's gotta be shilling.

Here's some trivia for you: I called Gonzo a fat fucking nobody once, and he has since based his entire business around it. Cool huh?

You again fail to realise wheres the problem.
But now I'm not even surprised.

i have no problems with direct nic. my domains will remain there.

Just to clarify, I don't think DirectNIC is fucking anyone in the ass either.. and my points are in regard to the role of a registrar and how far it can be taken.

You forgot Kimmy Kim, OldJeff and several others who have backed DirectNic :thumbsup

Dig, surely you've been around long enough to know I don't give a shit what people think about me - certainly not those in the adult biz. I'm arguing FOR contracts, not for DirectNic. People seem to think that they can agree to a contract and then yell "Oh wait, there's no law that says I have to do Paragraph 1, sentence A" and that's that. It doesn't work that way in the real world.

Dig, actually, I slept 8.5 hours last night (set the alarm clock accordingly) and did a bunch of graphic work while this has been going on. Thanks for your concern.

Actually, I haven't directly spoken to anyone at Directnic or Mike himself in probably 2 years now, except maybe for an in passing post on a board here (I think I kidded him recently about domain kiting, something Directnic apparently did well enough to get attention on the subject from the mainstream).

No, my only agenda here is to sit and laugh at people who would spend all their time and effort to protect a CJ site that has some fairly questionable looking (but legal) thumbs on it but that trades traffic and links to some pretty glaringly bad sites, including CP, toolbar, virus, and spyware installers.

When I take out the tote board and figure it all out, Directnic comes out looking like champs.

Darksoul, so if I am missing it, where is the problem? Are you saying that Directnic is obliged to do business with someone regardless of the material on their sites? Is Directnic obliged to maintain a contract under any circumstance?

Please, enlighten me, preferably with actual paragraphs and stuff, okay?

Thats pretty much the whole issue here.

Let's put it this way.. Why don't you contact a few affiliate programs and see how many of them will supply you with blacked out ID's of their models. Then come back here and tell us all how easy it is to get.

We aren't talking about buying content from a content producer.. We are talking about free sponsor provided content from FHG's.

Allow me to clue you in then, and perhaps clear up your misunderstandings here: A TOS is a CYA document. Every TOS in the world, for every business INCLUDING mine, basically says that the person posting the TOS can do anything they want, to anyone they want, at any time they want. That doesn't make it so. The question in this discussion is what a registrar is legally empowered to do, whether they can force you to do certain things on pain of losing your livelihood, and whether it's their place to police the intarwebs. FSC says it's not. Moniker says it's not. It's never been done before, and my best guess is that it's not going to be accepted by the webmaster community. It is a gross abuse of power and a giant overstepping of their boundaries.

Give up the TOS argument, it's irrelevant, you've repeated it until everyone is ready to throw up in their mouth a little bit.

I've taken 2 tests, written 7 (small) essays and found 4 pieces of property to look at while posting so neener :upsidedow

So you're saying that DN can close those domains and forget about it if they don't want to continue biz with Slick ?

That would be fun to watch, they'll get their asses burnt in a second.
Your old friends are already backing out, they're already limiting to 14 random thumbs. Is that a joke or what kind of investigation is that ?

Nobody is 'protecting a CJ site'. We're protecting OUR sites, because if they do it to this guy they'll do it to anyone. Especially considering that Mike has parked.com and many other competitive ventures with the people using his registrar service. It's only natural to suspect a less than angelic motive behind this action.

Also, NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY, is going to spend this much time defending the actions of a company they have no connection with. If I went to every single thread that has erupted concerning this situation and made a post, you would answer every single post. This isn't a casual thing for you, it's like life and death. Or a paycheck. You're not doing it because you have some deep seated affinity for the untrammeled power of registrars.

Dig, sorry, but again: You would oblige Directnic to do business with someone even if they feel the contract terms have been violated?

The FSC says that the registrar cannot do a 2257 inspection. Then again, the FSC also said that the FBI couldn't do any either, and we know exactly how far that went. Mr Douglas does not have all the facts in front of him (and neither do we) and his offering of an opinion without the facts is a little, well... premature?

Please show me the laws that say that the registrars are NOT allowed to assure that they are doing business with are operating in good faith and within the laws... I would like to read that.

Then Slick has a choice - he can disregard the TOS or abide by them. Again - somehow you've magically managed to see the future and see what's going to happen between now and the cut off date (which Slick says has been extended) and that DirectNic is going to screw Slick over in one way or another.

Amazing - can you tell me what tomorrow's lottery numbers are going to be too?

Damn, now I know why you apparently use to work for me :) :helpme

No, my only agenda here is to sit and laugh at people who would spend all their time and effort to protect a CJ site that has some fairly questionable looking (but legal) thumbs on it but that trades traffic and links to some pretty glaringly bad sites, including CP, toolbar, virus, and spyware installers.
--------------

so his site's legal and you STILL would support it being taken away from him?

wow that's quite a statement...

I forgot I also got the correct address for a letter I wrote back in October that never got received, rewrote the letter, did the envelope, wrote a check AND paid 4 bills. I'm a multitasking queen :)

As far as I'm concerned, they can refuse to do business with someone simply because they don't like the cut of his jib. What they CANNOT do is seize his domains and take for themselves the benefits of years of his work.

Its been posted in a thread already, I wont dig that now, but ICANN does not
tolerate closing a domain because you just felt like it. You need to have a court order for that.
Directnic has to follow ICANN regulations or they're toasted.

Very nice to tell someone your giving them an extension then the next day shut them down without notifying them, WOW CLASS ACT

abosutley awesome - a thread reaches 3 pages because someone tried to poach customers.


theres me thinking adult is just a playground of fun.

oh wait - it is!

In the event that anyone hasn't caught it yet...

http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=18587

No offense to Pete-KT.... but I'd like to hear someone from Moniker post publicly on GFY that "we will not do to you what directnic has done to their client" (Slick).

I see them opportunistically spamming their service, I do not see them assuring anyone that their policy on handling complaints is any different than anyone else's.

I believe that the bottom line on this is that DirectNic was doing what they thought was best, in the best interests of the general public, and that the intention was good. Everyone here at Moniker holds the crew at DN in high regard, even if are methods of handling the situation would be different.

Keeping those methods in mind, a registrars role is pretty well outlined in that our job is to keep our customer's domain names secure, and protect their interests as best we can, as well as ADVISE them of complaints.

CDSmith, In the thread that you are posting in right here, I have posted a few times making clear what our course of action would be in this case... I look forward to your responses to them. Cheers!

Thank you.


Although I do still see your mult-threaded campaign on here today as very opportunistic and spammish in nature. I'm sure you will get a sizeable chunk of Directnic's adult business from it though, which seems to be what you were going for, right?

Much luck to you. :D

From this actual thread ....
http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showpo...8&postcount=37

When i made this thread chris had no idea i was makin it, I made it because I was saying ive never had a problem with Moniker

That is why I said no offense to you. :D

They were ignoring or otherwise missed my post in their other thread though, the one made by one of their staffers, so I figured I might better get their attention in this one.


And don't get me wrong, I too will be carefully considering whether or not to move my own domains away from Directnic. Pending the outcome of this issue of course.

Cheers Pete.

CD, I have been largely focused on this particular thread because of the importance of the subject. There is no opportunism there, just a different writing style than me. I believe that Jrzeygirl was just answering in her own way, and hadn't had the opportunity to see this thread... thanks for the caution on it! Our intention is NOT to be opportunistic, but instead to be supportive of or clients, and respectfully present the differences between Moniker and other registrar's policies.