- What does it mean for us if registrars are able to reject customers without due process? (This is the industry-specific manifestation of, "Should private companies be allowed to reject customers?")
- Will this affect which registrars we trust?
- Is the bad press associated with this incident likely to harm our industry as a whole?
Why should a registrar have any due process? "No shoes, no shirt, no service", is an example as you recall those sorts of signs hanging in the front of say beach front establishments dating back to the 60's. Private retail businesses require certain standards in order to enter their establishment. Web hosts and Registrars cave to public pressure it seems to me, as Rob mentioned "some larger force" above. On the flip side, when one company controls 60% of the market, that's a problem. When no alternative registrars exist due to their spineless business acumen- that's the problem. Or "Weenies" as
@Rob Monster calls them. How many more Weenies in the future are going to cave in?
It's nice to see you write here Paul. Those are fair and good questions. Registrars in light of this recent event might refuse Customers. At least the weak knee ones. This "highly sensitive" social problem I believe is due to social media and instant-everything communication. Someone writes a hit piece, it gets posted on social media, and immediate instant public dogpile reactions.
As the Rolling Stones found with their drug arrests in their early days, negative publicity was publicity- free at that. Rob will probably get a boost perhaps in his business.
"Harming our industry"- well, I think like above comments made that this "Chan" problem brings attention to potentially cause more attacks on independent domains and websites. Yet, the irony those who write about this crap in "news" are no longer journalists, but opinion writers and promote it for eyeballs on both sides daily in the news do not help the problem. Meanwhile, hate groups are on Facebook and large entities on social media, yet no talk about that. Facebook and Google would imo like to wipe out websites they don't agree with. Silicon Valley has everybody it seems by the huevos. Seems like the agenda driven writers of such news even at Forbes as I pointed out above become "Drivel" and crap about incidents, people, etc. are the problem. People in general want a quick fix, take one pill and solve their problems or societies problems that have been the same since Man's existence. Nothing new, except news that travels fast and gets instant reactions.
Look at the other past events and take it off this one, hundreds of tragedies- say like the Dirty war in Argentina in the late 70's, or Idi Amin, Khadaffi, Saddam, Maduro or name that dictator who killed many thousands- there was no social media and or censorship, and not much attention or outrage, news didn't travel or was purposely masked by mass media, who knows. Documentary film makers and 60 minutes used to be the main sources for these stories. Back in time with no social media, there was no public outrage worldwide and political push since no instant real communication worldwide, no problem except for the local populations sadly. Why should NZ and A laws and opinions matter about the USA? Or vice versa?
The general public might actually push further and further to police or censor individual websites and blogs that are distasteful and give Zuckerberg and is ilk a free pass for more control. Meanwhile other "media" makes up stories and lies daily. Has the National Inquirer rag been censored before? I dunno, but certainly for years people actually bought that stupid rag at news counters with headlines that are beyond any sort of any rational or logical debate.
No derail here- but this "Industry" has a much larger problem of business ethics than that sort of trust with Registrars not regging controversial names or holding them like this one news report among many:
https://www.namepros.com/threads/le...holding-domains-hostage.1141035/#post-7275039
As a fairly new investor, I've pointed out numerous times in various threads that market making, price discovery games, shill bidding, group and partnership bidding, bidding bots that people complain about instead of just not bidding on those platforms, fake appraisal tools, people who write about and report fake sales and manipulation of related data as to real news.
If a sales is not made or falls through, no big deal- the people involved should report that it's back on the market and get more publicity.
"Industry Trust"? "Bad Press"- Where is the news follow up or retraction here?
https://www.namepros.com/threads/nd...g-new-chart-but-its-a-big-win-for-kb.1126860/
How about looking within the Industry news reporting about itself? Reported as sold for 7 figures, still resolves to the brokers page months after (March 2019) Is this fake domain news reported?, yet the news article still exists as a sensational news item, no follow up To me that is like National Inquirer. Maybe change the headline "Aliens abducted Chocolate" and nobody knows what planet it was sent to.
That type of "news" and "reporting" hurts the industry worse that outside forces.