With all the DirectNic trouble lately (my thoughts) - Page 3 - GoFuckYourself.com

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

Is it so hard to grasp that some content producer could take a current id
and say the content was produced x months ago while it was produced several years ago ?

think trice.

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?

Lazonby · 12-14-2006, 10:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete-KT

With all the DirectNic trouble lately (my thoughts)

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?

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 10:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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?

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.

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

You should at least try to fake that you understand whats beeing talked about.

Nobody has a problem with directnic trying to work out with Slick, the problem is how they do it.

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

MacDevilish · 12-14-2006, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

Neither is a host or a billing company, but they do the same thing.

Since Slick's admitted that at least one of the sites was questionable, would have let it go at that or reported him for having CP on his sites?

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!

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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

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.

Pete-KT · 12-14-2006, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

hey Pete, do me a favor, keep your insults to yourself. If you have a problem with my comments, address the comments. Name calling and insults just point out how much you have really lost your grip on the whole deal.

You don't like Directnic, fine, don't do business with them. I am just disgusted to see you and Chris here trying to drum up buisness against them. Sharks in the water, smelling blood, perhaps?

I don't have a horse in this race. I don't do business with either. If you hadn't come out touting moniker, your comments regarding Directnic might have a little more weight.

Too bad.

Now if you want to play name calling and insult games, I suggest you go to the sandbox in the park near your house. The kids over there might enjoy it.

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.

Pete-KT · 12-14-2006, 11:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lazonby

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?

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

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

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.

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.

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:06 AM

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.

Brujah · 12-14-2006, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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.

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?

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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.

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 ?

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

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.

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:20 AM

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.

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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.

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.

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

WE got your point! We signed a contract that allows DN to fuck us in the ass.

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.

scottybuzz · 12-14-2006, 11:23 AM

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

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

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.

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.

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by darksoul

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.

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.

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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.

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.

dig420 · 12-14-2006, 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

I have known most of the people involved with Directnic since before you could get on the internet. Interestingly, I don't have a single domain registered with them (and I have a large number of domains).

I also do no business with them.

I also know a number of other registrars, and I would come out to support them in the same manner as I am supporting Directnic right now. CP is a horrible, horrible problem that not only hurts our business, but hurts innocent children. I can never fault anyone for wanting to handle this situation carefully and not just pass the buck.

Chris, while I am sure you appreciate Pete's fine friendship, the nature of this thread and it's title is misleading, and looks like a very shrill sort of shill for your business. I would suggest that you privately ask him to better time his sales campaigns so that it doesn't look like you are trying to dance on Directnic's prematurely dug grave.

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?

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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

seeric · 12-14-2006, 11:36 AM

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

Brujah · 12-14-2006, 11:39 AM

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.

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dig420

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.

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

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.

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:42 AM

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?

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brujah

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.

Thats pretty much the whole issue here.

crockett · 12-14-2006, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

crocket, ID with the name, address, and other personal information blacked out.

What is so hard about that? Content providers have been doing that in some cases since 1995.

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.

dig420 · 12-14-2006, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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

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.

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.

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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.

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

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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?

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 ?

dig420 · 12-14-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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?

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.

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:49 AM

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.

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dig420

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.

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?

RawAlex · 12-14-2006, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peaches

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

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

dig420 · 12-14-2006, 11:52 AM

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...

Peaches · 12-14-2006, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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

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

dig420 · 12-14-2006, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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

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.

darksoul · 12-14-2006, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RawAlex

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.

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.

Pete-KT · 12-14-2006, 12:18 PM

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

scottybuzz · 12-14-2006, 12:19 PM

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!

MacDevilish · 12-14-2006, 01:36 PM

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

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

CDSmith · 12-14-2006, 01:47 PM

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.

MacDevilish · 12-14-2006, 02:01 PM

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.

MacDevilish · 12-14-2006, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

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.

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!

CDSmith · 12-14-2006, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonikerChris

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.

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

directfiesta · 12-14-2006, 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

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).

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonikerChris

Wow... I need to catch up on this a bit... I appreciate the support from Pete, recommending Moniker service in general, and the service I do my best to provide in specific. Whether he is trying to make money for me, or just being infomative, Moniker's dedication to our clients is verifiably excellent.

With regard to DirectNic, they are good people and friends of ours, and I am unsure exactly what the motivation was for their inquiry and actions, but I don't think that it is an "across the board" policy for their company. Since I don't work for them, I won't guess how their policy is changing, or what future plans they might have.

What I CAN speak to is MONIKER'S policy with regard to complaints or objections to our clients websites and domains. We don't shut you down for complaints... Let's face it... it is the adult industry, SOMEBODY is going to have a problem with it somewhere, so we expect for there to be complaints... the difference between us and many other registrars is that we will TALK TO YOU about it before taking any action.

From this standpoint, RawAlex, it is understandable why Pete would be talking about Moniker and me... We PROTECT HIS INTRESTS. We make sure that he, and all of our other many adult and adult related clients continue to make money by NOT yielding to complaints. On a daily basis we recieve complaints and orders to "cease and desist"... I don't get shaken up when they come in, because normally they are just sent to rattle cages and try and scare us into shutting a site down. Suffice it to say that we don't scare easily.

I am grateful for all the clients that I work with, and for the friendships that I have with my clients. Pete is a good friend, as are many others. I will continue to protect their interests as best I can.

Pete-KT · 12-14-2006, 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

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

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

CDSmith · 12-14-2006, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pete-KT

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.

MacDevilish · 12-14-2006, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDSmith

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

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.

12-14-2006, 11:23 AM	#117
scottybuzz Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Location: NY Posts: 14,800	this thread fucking rules too bad i didnt get my spot of sigin here,. __________________ $$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

12-14-2006, 11:39 AM	#124
Brujah Beer Money Baron Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: brujah / gmail Posts: 22,157	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. __________________ Free Premium Domain Lists and Tools at Clickmojo.com For Sale: Obscenity.com

12-14-2006, 12:19 PM	#141
scottybuzz Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2006 Location: NY Posts: 14,800	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! __________________ $$$$$ MAKE HUGE MONEY IN CAMS - CLICK HERE $$$$$

12-14-2006, 01:36 PM	#142
MacDevilish Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pompano Beach Florida Posts: 243	In the event that anyone hasn't caught it yet... http://xbiz.com/news_piece.php?id=18587 __________________ Another of the Mighty Moniker Execs... ICQ:210870714 ...[email protected] ...Give me a yell if you have questions on domain names!!

12-14-2006, 01:47 PM	#143
CDSmith Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Location: My network is hosted at TECHIEMEDIA.net ...Wait, you meant where am I located at? Oh... okay, I'm in Winnipeg, Canada. Oops. :) Posts: 51,460	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. __________________ *Promote Wildmatch, ImLive, Sexier.com, and more!!* ALWAYS THE HIGHEST PAYOUTS: Big Bux/ImLive SIGNUP ON NOW!!! Put some PUSSYCA$H in your pocket. ICQ me at: 31024634

12-14-2006, 11:06 AM	#110
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	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.

12-14-2006, 11:20 AM	#114
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	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.

12-14-2006, 11:36 AM	#123
seeric .......... Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: .......... Posts: 41,917	i have no problems with direct nic. my domains will remain there.

12-14-2006, 11:42 AM	#126
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	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?

12-14-2006, 11:49 AM	#133
RawAlex So Fucking Banned Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: In a house. Posts: 9,465	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.

12-14-2006, 11:52 AM	#136
dig420 Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: May 2001 Posts: 9,240	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...

12-14-2006, 12:18 PM	#140
Pete-KT Workin With The Devil Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: West Bloomfield, MI Posts: 51,532	Very nice to tell someone your giving them an extension then the next day shut them down without notifying them, WOW CLASS ACT

12-14-2006, 02:01 PM	#144
MacDevilish Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Pompano Beach Florida Posts: 243	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. __________________ Another of the Mighty Moniker Execs... ICQ:210870714 ...[email protected] ...Give me a yell if you have questions on domain names!!