Dynadot

What's going on with Epik and Rob Monster?

Spaceship Spaceship
Watch

MapleDots

Account Closed (Requested)
Impact
13,169
I'm catching the tail end of this, seems to be some kind of controversy...

https://domaingang.com/domain-news/rob-monster-off-twitter-after-christchurch-massacre-controversy/

Must be something odd to evoke this type of a response from one of our members.

Picture0016.png
 
8
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Lets start with one simple one. Chocolate. Supposedly sold for 7 figures. Months go by and it still points to the Brokers page. I comment on it about nameservers changes and one got erased immediately after my post here. I commented several more times, now its finally moved and now parked on the same IP as with football, basketball and some other ordinary domains, probably a vps. So question is since it is under privacy, is it the same registrant as the sports domain? SecurityDetails shows the brokers favicon right now. Lol. So, something seems strange. Was the NDA story given to said publisher duped for price discovery games? Or did the sale fall through? Or was it complete B.S? This sort of thing happens frequently.

There is a weekly journal that publishes information about sales on thursdays here. Lots of rah, rah and cheering like an old sitcom from some. I have dug deeper and became very skeptical and question some of these big sales after they are parked and or find things that are seemingly untrue, or failed sales. No problem, sales do fall through. Except some people especially new people believe it as gospel. Most do not look deeper than the headlines.

FWIW, I was a $1 million investor in Internet Real Estate Group back in the day, and am still a LLC member. I did talk to Andy Miller about that exit shortly after it happened. The transaction was under NDA so I don't have much to say. I can say I have yet to see any ROI from that investment and have limited confidence that there will be return of capital, let alone return on capital. I did get an education. However, again, not sure this thread would be the place to go deep dive on the legitimacy of specific transactions.
 
3
•••
domain industry is better off for your engagement and stewardship.

I have no self interest whatsoever. I don’t wholesale with others, I don’t have a blog, or advertisers to please in this industry, don’t attend conferences nor plan to attend, and have zero ties really by design nor do I sell domains here or want any attention or publicity. I am just tired of some people who lack integrity, and not afraid to be a pundit to the B.S.

The Fake sales data might be great and self serving for a few short term, but long term its truly bad. These automated appraisals are the same, they dupe people into believing some fake value.

This industry thrives on duping newcomers it seems, the MLM sort of false hope model.

So if No newbies, nobody to sell information, schooling, or auction their junk domains to.

As a company who is a registrar, you need to grow so I get it. You mention “Market makers” before which to me is bothersome, maybe I misunderstand you. The true market is the end user, the consumer. Not domainer to domainer sales.

The consumer sees domain investors as squatters, another problem that seems little is addressed PR wise in my studying.
 
4
•••
FWIW, I was a $1 million investor in Internet Real Estate Group back in the day, and am still a LLC member. I did talk to Andy Miller about that exit shortly after it happened. The transaction was under NDA so I don't have much to say. I can say I have yet to see any ROI from that investment and have limited confidence that there will be return of capital, let alone return on capital. I did get an education. However, again, not sure this thread would be the place to go deep dive on the legitimacy of specific transactions.

Gibraltar based bearer share corporation?

https://www.namepros.com/threads/bidding-on-your-own-names-at-namejet.1030874/page-32#post-6268222
 
2
•••
I have no self interest whatsoever. I don’t wholesale with others, I don’t have a blog, or advertisers to please in this industry, don’t attend conferences nor plan to attend, and have zero ties really by design nor do I sell domains here or want any attention or publicity. I am just tired of some people who lack integrity, and not afraid to be a pundit to the B.S.

The Fake sales data might be great and self serving for a few short term, but long term its truly bad. These automated appraisals are the same, they dupe people into believing some fake value.

This industry thrives on duping newcomers it seems, the MLM sort of false hope model.

So if No newbies, nobody to sell information, schooling, or auction their junk domains to.

As a company who is a registrar, you need to grow so I get it. You mention “Market makers” before which to me is bothersome, maybe I misunderstand you. The true market is the end user, the consumer. Not domainer to domainer sales.

The consumer sees domain investors as squatters, another problem that seems little is addressed PR wise in my studying.

I believe the sustainable wins come mainly from help domain investors sell domains to end-users who need them for some venture or idea. That is the use-case we are focused on which is why at Epik:

1. We feature and promote TLDs that we think have viable after-markets, and sell them at/below cost on a regular basis through promos and NamePros pricing.

2. We provide free, fast, SEO-friendly SSL landers that reveal full contact details of the incoming inquiries.

3. We actively help folks close sales and lease deals through full-service escrow, fairness opinions, appraisals and vetting of inbound inquiries for those customers who are not available to look at them.

4. We lend money interest-free against domains that we think are worth keeping, and don't foreclose on anyone who is working in good faith to settle up eventually.

Of course in the spirit of free will, you can still buy most TLDs at Epik but if a customer will engage us, we'll certainly try to help them succeed. The folks who have worked with us for any length of time will surely to attest to it.

This can be a tough business, but for the folks who do crack the code on selling to motivated end-users it is fantastically lucrative and offers great quality of life. I do know this first-hand and not just from the lucky old-timers who hand-regged in 1994!
 
5
•••
You say you need more fodder, I challenge you to call out all the corruption in this dinky industry like Rick Schwartz does. I see you attended his meet up. Instead of politics and religion, why not talk about how crooked some people are? They are your competitors, and bringing transparency to this would be nice.

Sure, It might be a top thread, but it would be nice if you shed some light on all the fake stuff and real scandals in this industry. I think you might have mentioned whose blog and comments started this thread. So whats your take on domaining school, the how-to-buy domain video series, the greater fool theory, the fake sales announcements, the passing around names from one registrant to another for price discovery and fake publicity for the pricing database, etc.



Whay not create a new discussion raising your issue? Confuses what we are talking about.
 
0
•••
I believe the sustainable wins come mainly from help domain investors sell domains to end-users who need them for some venture or idea. That is the use-case we are focused on which is why at Epik:

It would be helpful to all if instead of landers only, you or someone had an open marketplace like Craigslist that end users would visit directly, perhaps a tie in to your new search tool. A site that ranked up high in SEO. Right now, its difficult as GD dominates the consumer mind. The marketplace could be funded and have paid placements for those who wish to bid for top ranking, much like Overture before it was gamed by click farms and sold.

Not a Brandbucket 30% thing with search dominated by insider trading thing though.

If you focus on startups then do you publish or have publicist for Techcrunch or one of the VC focused media outlets?
 
0
•••
Last edited:
0
•••
I thought that Free Speech (or actually protecting Free Speech) was at the core of the discussion about what was going on at Epik as the title of this thread indicates. I am disappointed to see that everyone here couldn’t connect at a higher level and have allowed this thread to succumb to the same old politics that punishes people for expressing their point of views. It seems that instead of taking a few positive steps forward to come to a Universal consensus on the issue of Free Speech people here have now taken some steps backwards as everyone is retreating to the same old and familiar fronts of hate and division.
 
4
•••
A lot of difference of opinion happening here, which in my eyes is the core of speaking freely. Although some words harsher and snappier than others, it's all a matter of context and personality. There are reasonings behind most posts here, not just accusations and name calling, and all are given equal opportunity to respond. Where some may lack grace and acceptance, they might make up for in fortitude and determination for their cause.

I think regardless of one's position on a subject, the opportunity to read another's view and respond without being silenced by the medium which is being used is in and of itself a sort of "universality". I think though, the massive cultural and traditional histories each individual carries in their bloodline and throughout their upbringing should be taken into consideration when trying to come to a consensus on such a broad subject as freedom of speech.

It is ok to establish a general guideline, perhaps, in the sake of civility, but should never be enforced as an ultimatum. We should not squash what we do not agree with, but we can determine what is right for our own eyes, ears and mouth only, never for others.
 
5
•••
A lot of difference of opinion happening here, which in my eyes is the core of speaking freely. Although some words harsher and snappier than others, it's all a matter of context and personality. There are reasonings behind most posts here, not just accusations and name calling, and all are given equal opportunity to respond. Where some may lack grace and acceptance, they might make up for in fortitude and determination for their cause.

I think regardless of one's position on a subject, the opportunity to read another's view and respond without being silenced by the medium which is being used is in and of itself a sort of "universality". I think though, the massive cultural and traditional histories each individual carries in their bloodline and throughout their upbringing should be taken into consideration when trying to come to a consensus on such a broad subject as freedom of speech.

It is ok to establish a general guideline, perhaps, in the sake of civility, but should never be enforced as an ultimatum. We should not squash what we do not agree with, but we can determine what is right for our own eyes, ears and mouth only, never for others.

I think a couple of wise comments from @oldtimer and @HotKey here.

The clever thing is that NamePros is pretty much on the record -- it is very hard to delete or edit a post after a brief time. Of course people can be quoted out of context, but the record is fairly clear on the position people take. They also have an opportunity to defend their logic and/or be persuaded otherwise. I say "persuaded" and not goaded, intimidated, bullied or harassed.

The issue which should now be reasonably obvious to any objective observer of group dynamics is the all-or-nothing, my-way-or-the-highway tactics of an intolerant and vocal minority. The capacity to find compromise and common ground requires discernment, intelligence and independent thinking. That is the exact opposite of a "hive mind".

All that said, I remain open to one on one phone calls with anyone that has strongly opposing views and wishes to discuss their position with an open mind and a civil tone. I will certainly do the same and am always curious to understand why the other person thinks the way they do. More times than not it is irrational fear or anxiety.

Anyway, I appreciate the discussion and am actively listening. I am especially listening to authentic people who use their actual identities, i.e. if I know the person behind the avatar, it is a whole lot easier to relate even if that identity is otherwise concealed to the general public. I will also happily apply Chatham House rules upon request.
 
Last edited:
3
•••
All that said, I remain open to one on one phone calls with anyone that has strongly opposing views and wishes to discuss their position with an open mind and a civil tone.

Rob if there is going to be a civil and constructive debate wouldn’t it be better if we all heard each other’s opinion and point of views here in public rather than having a private conversation on the phone between only two people. To me that sounds like voluntary censorship as noone else is going to benefit from the opinions expressed in those private conversations.

Also to have a civil and constructive debate requires for everyone to reframe from using labels or making personal attacks as those might discourage some in participating in the conversation. I personally like to hear all sides of the issue whether I agree with it or not. Being tolerant of other Individuals' opinions and point of views or those of a Hive Mind (as you say) are all part of having respect for Free Speech.
 
1
•••
Rob if there is going to be a civil and constructive debate wouldn’t it be better if we all heard each other’s opinion and point of views here in public rather than having a private conversation on the phone between only two people. To me that sounds like voluntary censorship as noone else is going to benefit from the opinions expressed in those private conversations.

Also to have a civil and constructive debate requires for everyone to reframe from using labels or making personal attacks as those might discourage some in participating in the conversation. I personally like to hear all sides of the issue whether I agree with it or not. Being tolerant of other Individuals' opinions and point of views or those of a Hive Mind (as you say) are all part of having respect for Free Speech.

The public debate is happening already. However, egos get involved there and some things are not fit for print. Hence my offer to speak to anyone, including people who don't agree with me. It helps to have context and try to find common ground.

For example, event though I think TCK is out to lunch on many topics, I did find common ground with him on some narrow themes of theological debate in this thread. I don't dislike him but I do think his intentions are enigmatic and not entirely benevolent.

Procedurally, I do take issue with "sock puppet" accounts and may enlist the moderators to police this thread for brigading, notably by sock puppet accounts that may attempt to propagate a manufactured consensus. It is a standard tactic and I will happily expose it.

Finally, this thread is becoming a sort of Master Class for dealing with people with agendas. Unlike Twitter and Facebook which have over left-leaning agendas, NamePros is essentially neutral and mostly laissez-faire which is actually quite refreshing!
 
1
•••
Procedurally, I do take issue with "sock puppet" accounts and may enlist the moderators to police this thread for brigading, notably by sock puppet accounts that may attempt to propagate a manufactured consensus. It is a standard tactic and I will happily expose it.

Look who's being paranoid now. So when you can't using logic and reasoning to support your positions, you are now looking to shut accounts down that don't agree with you. Hmmm. We've moved so far away from protecting free speech, haven't we.

I don't dislike him but I do think his intentions are enigmatic and not entirely benevolent.

I thought you were non-judgmental.

The simple fact is that I love everyone and judge nobody.

I am one who believes in free speech within the bounds of US law. If the US law changes, our policies will adapt to that law.

The fact is, your posts betray such self-righteous assertions.
 
0
•••
Look who's being paranoid now. So when you can't using logic and reasoning to support your positions, you are now looking to shut accounts down that don't agree with you. Hmmm. We've moved so far away from protecting free speech, haven't we.



I thought you were non-judgmental.





The fact is, your posts betray such self-righteous assertions.

I am not judging. In fact, I am consistently engaging you thoughtfully, civilly and professionally and with my real known persona. I extend the same courtesy to Frank.

As for being self-righteous, to the contrary. That actually has a narrow definition, and for sure I am resting in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ -- every day.

Iif you are honest with yourself, you will see that your own DNPlaybook posts were extremely quick to judge and condemn with very little context and no direct inquiry.

So, yes, I question your intentions. I frankly think you are a propagandist and not a journalist. However, do I think God loves you? Yes, I do!
 
Last edited:
0
•••
0
•••

I tried to watch that movie. I got a few minutes in and found it incredibly boring. It has like no views and is not compelling. As for the new movie, I did not check it.

As for what happened between 1939 and 1945 in Central Europe, I don't have a dog in that hunt. We are simply providing domains to people who use them lawfully.

Our Terms of Service are based on US Law, adjudicated in King County WA. If someone has an issue with a site, let them seek a decision in a qualified court.

Beyond that, we'll use a light hand. We will process takedown requests for Doxing, targeted violent incitement, and blatantly illegal content.

There is a "Report" link next to any video that should be checked.
 
Last edited:
1
•••
I don't dislike him but I do think his intentions are enigmatic and not entirely benevolent.

I am not judging.

When you say what my intentions may or may not be. That is the very definition of judging. You don't know me. You can't read my heart. So how can you know what my intentions are?

Dapper Jane and TCK even talk the same. Case closed.

The weak attempt at a brigade of manufactured consensus has failed.

This is yet another example of judging. You accuse me of creating a so-called "sock puppet" account and manufacturing consensus?

You may write about yourself that you are "not judging". But your posts paint a different picture.

As for being self-righteous, to the contrary. That actually has a narrow definition, and for sure I am resting in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ -- every day.

In one sentence you write you are not self-righteous, but in the very next sentence you make a completely self-righteous assertion.
 
Last edited:
0
•••
When you say what my intentions may or may not be. That is the very definition of judging. You don't know me. You can't read my heart. So how can you know what my intentions are?



This is yet another example of judging. You accuse me of creating a so-called "sock puppet" account and manufacturing consensus?

You may write about yourself that you are "not judging". But your posts paint a different picture.



In one sentence you write you are not self-righteous, but in the very next sentence you make a completely self-righteous assertion.

Hugs Bro.
 
4
•••
Last edited:
3
•••
Its good to see that there is some improvement in relations here, now lets get everyone else on board and engage in a civilized and constructive way that can produce something of value for the domaining community here and beyond.

Lets start with this question:

Are Free Speech and Human Rights in general Universal or not, and if not isn't it time in our social evolution for our cultures, religions, customs and traditions, and our laws to adjust to the Universality of Free Speech and Human Rights instead of the other way around.
 
2
•••
I thought that Free Speech (or actually protecting Free Speech) was at the core of the discussion about what was going on at Epik as the title of this thread indicates. I am disappointed to see that everyone here couldn’t connect at a higher level and have allowed this thread to succumb to the same old politics that punishes people for expressing their point of views. It seems that instead of taking a few positive steps forward to come to a Universal consensus on the issue of Free Speech people here have now taken some steps backwards as everyone is retreating to the same old and familiar fronts of hate and division.

I am ignoring @offthehandle just not to push me offtherails. Unless someone took a law class, which any one can do; coursera "introduction to English Common Law", it is hard to have a consensus on understanding what free speech and other rights means in legalese or as intended. Most people seem to think terms like "free speech" are inherently common language and mean "free" as in "free beer" rather than "free to take the subway" which ofcourse you have to buy a ticket to ride.

Most legal systems understand this fact and that explains why there is a litany of other laws to give and at the same time take or regulate those rights subsquently as needed. So yes, we are working towards a consensus even though there is lots of colorful language in the discussion. Keep heart!
 
Last edited:
2
•••
1
•••
Lets start with this question:

Are Free Speech and Human Rights in general Universal or not, and if not isn't it time in our social evolution for our cultures, religions, customs and traditions, and our laws to adjust to the Universality of Free Speech and Human Rights instead of the other way around.

Maybe our discernment abilities could also be added to the list that needs adjusting, to deal with some free speech(?) Eg. Using Edward de Bono's 6 Thinking Hats, in a Christian setting:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60fa/9860f73a4a457f447359c06900d2fc46adb5.pdf

The business of business is staying in business.

Maybe that's a view that also could use some adjusting(?) Eg.:

https://www.fastcompany.com/9030501...=10&partner=newsletter&campaign_date=02132019

I think of Epik as making that adjustment.
 
0
•••

Maybe our discernment abilities could also be added to the list that needs adjusting, to deal with some free speech(?) Eg. Using Edward de Bono's 6 Thinking Hats, in a Christian setting:
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60fa/9860f73a4a457f447359c06900d2fc46adb5.pdf



Maybe that's a view that also could use some adjusting(?) Eg.:

https://www.fastcompany.com/90305018/its-time-to-awaken-the-humanity-in-business?utm_source=postup&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Fast Company Daily&position=10&partner=newsletter&campaign_date=02132019

I think of Epik as making that adjustment.

I will review those links but wanted to acknowledge the word "Discernment". I think it is a good word, and actually considered by some to be a spiritual gift. Solomon had it, for a time at least, as is famously demonstrated in the story of "splitting the baby" (see 1 Kings 3:16-28). Solomon was a great king in part because he was a great judge.

As I think about who to serve and who not to serve, I deal with that issue on a daily basis. It is a difficult thing, since I am a fan of free speech. However, consider a site that wants to post content about "assisted suicide". This is a real case. Where does one draw the line between empowering death, and defusing self-harm? Not easy.

Although it is rarely profitable to do this, when there is a complaint, I will often call the target of the complaint and try to understand their intent. If they are misanthropes, we are not going to be their supplier. If they are edgy, but not malicious and are committed to helping humanity in some capacity, we will consider looking beyond the controversy.

In the recent case of 8 Chan, I could not get comfortable fast enough to make a decision so we opted not to route that host even though we had, and have, the technical ability to do it. There was no clear way to assess intent, nor adequate apparatus in place for the client to enforce that intent.

Anyway, the topic is a good one. That said, the topic is not a new thing for registrars and hosts. I believe many suppliers will simply bow down to the loudmouths and part ways with the controversy. The harder task is to try to get to the why behind the what -- to get to the HEART of the matter.

Keep your heart with all diligence, For out of it spring the issues of life.


- Proverbs 4:23
 
Last edited:
2
•••
Its good to see that there is some improvement in relations here, now lets get everyone else on board and engage in a civilized and constructive way that can produce something of value for the domaining community here and beyond.

Lets start with this question:

Are Free Speech and Human Rights in general Universal or not, and if not isn't it time in our social evolution for our cultures, religions, customs and traditions, and our laws to adjust to the Universality of Free Speech and Human Rights instead of the other way around.

I have had a few minutes over lunch to think through your serious question and here is my thoughts. Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 assumed that Rights can be inherently general by status of being human. But then we know that even though, the majority of nations are signatories to the 1949 charter, the standards of what constitutes human rights varies across jurisdictions. Lets take a quick look at Article 1 of the US constitution.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the freeexercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

You see herein that the founders assumed those rights can be universal. You can see this too in the declaration of independence "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" giving three examples of the unalienable rights to all humans by their creator, and which government should protect.

In the examples above, no conditional circumstances where given, to allow for the removal of those rights from a human being. And I guess that was achievable back then, in the world in which they lived. Now think about this for a second and ask yourself a few question and i am asking myself these;

1. If all peoples in the United States are endowed the above rights, why where there slavery (takes away the right to liberty and the persuit of happiness)
2. Why do we have prisons? (they take a way the right to liberty and the persuit of happiness)
3. Why do we take people to jail for inciting violence or inciting harm to others (Commonwealth v. Carter, in the text-suicide case which many believe its freedom of speech)

You will find the answer in the thinking that good law, is not written in stone, it evolves having been tested in the economy of practice; the real world. This is true when you think about situations where certain groups of gender identity have been disqualified from serving in the millitary (takes away their rights to the persuit of happiness) and landmark cases such as Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919); the case of inciting actions that would harm others (e.g., “shouting fire
in a crowded theater.” or in this case Carter bluntly telling her boy friend to "Now Die".


Or in Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1988); rejecting the right for students to print articles in a school newspaper over the objections of the school administration.


The last 2 being cases one would think violate the fist amendment and the universal human rights charter.


But then you realize that subsequent interpretations of laws, the law being of "hive-mind" (borrowing from a friend here) fuelled by precedent allows curtailing ALL freedoms including unalienable rights. The question should be whether such curtailing constitutes just law.


Providing a platform that enables hate speech (which is unregulated of its self), resulting in an act where the freedom of others are deprived or harm, suffering and injury of others is insured can be a legal liability.


I would argue too that places such 8chan, 4chan, dailystormer and that site @frank-germany exposed with the Nazi stuff are acting on a thin and misconstrued notion of freedom of speech. It will become clear to them when a subscriber of theirs unfortunatley uses the platform to incite violence that leads to mass deaths and victims families suing them.


In conclusion, even though I long to live in a world where freedom and rights are universal, its an utopian ideal that is far down our evolutionary tree. For now, I prefer to think that good law, is JUST law. And just law is informed and evolves to meet the prevailing needs of society to encourage harmonious social order. I am sorry I am long winded. I wanted to give this some thoughtfulness. But don't be discouraged, Out of ashes, dust rises. There is no substitute to doing right. Right prevails atleast always.
 
Last edited:
4
•••
Back