Dynadot โ€” .com Transfer

Is Adam Dicker a criminal? You decide.

Spacemail by SpaceshipSpacemail by Spaceship
Watch

S-B

Account Closed
Impact
5,263
This story starts with DNF; a barren wasteland that once was a leading forum within the domain industry. While the forum itself played a huge role in propagating the myth that is Adam Dicker, the story really begins with DNF College in the summer of 2011.

Read More




Updates / Reports
These are in no particular order.

From what I understand, Adam still owes north of $33,000 to previous customers and business partners. As I receive more information, I will update this figure.
 
44
•••
The views expressed on this page by users and staff are their own, not those of NamePros.
Unstoppable Domains โ€” AI StorefrontUnstoppable Domains โ€” AI Storefront
It baffles me why anyone would spend their free time on a Saturday morning defending this person. This is not a case of someone biting off more than they could chew and making a mistake. He has a long documented history of repeatedly disregarding ethics and the law. The time for the benefit of the doubt was long over.
 
5
•••
0
•••
2
•••
It baffles me why anyone would spend their free time on a Saturday morning defending this person.

It baffles me that there are adults who don't understand the concept of time zones, it is almost 5pm here, other than that I agree.... very difficult to muster together a defense for him.
 
0
•••
Now we know a lot more about the individuals who bestowed "Developer of the Year" honors. How clueless or corrupt are they?

Why are you so keen to make this about other people? This is about Adam Dicker and the various people who feel like they were deceived out of time and/or money.
 
0
•••
It baffles me why anyone would spend their free time on a Saturday morning defending this person. This is not a case of someone biting off more than they could chew and making a mistake. He has a long documented history of repeatedly disregarding ethics and the law. The time for the benefit of the doubt was long over.


its mine time
I can do what I want?
think so
6pm
 
2
•••
A little off-topic, but I was watching a few poker clips on YouTube.
It is amazing the resemblance between Adam Dicker and Mike Matusow.
 
4
•••
A little off-topic, but I was watching a few poker clips on YouTube.
It is amazing the resemblance between Adam Dicker and Mike Matusow.
..and his nickname is "The Mouth". :)
 
0
•••
Adam or the poker player ^
 
0
•••
A little off-topic, but I was watching a few poker clips on YouTube.
It is amazing the resemblance between Adam Dicker and Mike Matusow.

I gues there is few poker players on NamePros, because you sir deserve more likes!
 
0
•••
Consider this my only significant contribution to the case against Adam Dicker...
So, how did DNF get 125185 new members in one day in May of this year?

Show attachment 17066

So to put the idea that DNF had inflated numbers to bed, here's what I know.
I believe we had users in a group that were not showing in the overall user count so they were moved to a group that would show them. We certainly did not have 125,000 users sign up that day nor did I or anyone on staff type them all in manually. I hope that helps.

Allow me to first disclose that I own an established internet forum on advanced software so I am familiar with forum back ends. Invision, the software that I also use, also has a system of 'user groups' and 'permissions'.

Let me explain that I haven't simply done this to prove Adam Dicker to be a liar, as that wouldn't be a productive use of my time, I also own the domain motorforum.co.uk (you can verify that by looking at the whois details) and I've been considering looking into xenforo should I decide to build that out.

A fellow namepros user was kind enough to allow me admin access to look at the backend of his fresh xenforo install. It appears to be the exact software version being used by DNF. I've just spent over an hour looking through every single page under options, as well as 'applications', and 'tools', and could find no settings for the standard statistics module which would allow me to count or discount members from a specific user group.

I also played with user groups. I could find no means of discounting any specific user group from the member count.

The ONLY way I could see to reduce and subsequently increase the member count is to ban a user and then unban that user, in which case they go into the 'Banned Users' group - the one user group which doesn't show in the member count. Even that appears to require a cache being cleared or a rebuild/recount to impact on the member count.

Furthermore, I contacted a programmer who I know through the invision community who sold me a plugin for an old version of invision. I did so because I know he also codes his plugins for the xenforo platform. He also could not think of any backend settings which would exclude a member from the member count, apart from the banned user group.

Then you get the possibility that there was a bug or glitch in the software which was causing incorrect member counts to be displayed. Only, a thorough search of the xenforo support topics do not provide any evidence that this is a problem experienced by any other user.

I am open to Adam Dicker giving me a more thorough step-by-step explanation which shows me precisely how it is that a user group was excluded from the member count, and if he can do that I will log back in and attempt to replicate the issue again.

As things stand the only possibilities appear to be one of these:
  1. There were 125,000 banned users of dnf who were all unbanned on the same day.
  2. The membership statistics were purposely falsified in some way, via custom programming or a third party plugin/script.
Either of those scenarios bring about some serious ethical questions. I'm sure I'm not alone in considering option 2 to be the more likely scenario.

Like I said, I'm open to Adam Dicker proving that there is a setting in the backend which could exclude a user group from the member count which I could subsequently attempt to replicate, or an explanation as to why he unbanned 125,000 members in one day, but I'm not hopeful that I'd get one.

As things stand this completely rules out any possibility of me ever joining that forum, and I'm sure it will influence the decision of some others too. I wouldn't sign up to a forum owned by somebody who cannot be trusted to be honest, and in the unlikely event that scenario 1 happened here, I wouldn't want to share a forum with 125,000 people who were deemed dodgy enough to warrant a banning in the past.
 
Last edited:
3
•••
So I did find out what happened here:

What was done was any user that had not confirmed their email address was changed to confirmed in the database so that people could receive site emails

Feel free to test this out as well.
 
0
•••
So I did find out what happened here:

What was done was any user that had not confirmed their email address was changed to confirmed in the database so that people could receive site emails

Feel free to test this out as well.

I will test that out shortly, you may be on to something there.
 
0
•••
So I did find out what happened here:

What was done was any user that had not confirmed their email address was changed to confirmed in the database so that people could receive site emails

Feel free to test this out as well.

I can confirm having tested that this explanation is feasible, you could have manually approved 125000 user accounts that haven't clicked a confirmation link in their email to confirm their registration.

Unfortunately this raises another question of ethics for me, by manually approving registrations which haven't been verified by the owner of the email address used aren't you potentially sending unsolicited email to many of them? The verification process exists for a reason, for the owner of the email account to confirm that they signed up for your service and consent to receiving your emails?

And I would have to question the wisdom of approving thousands of accounts which could have been created by spam bots!

Not to mention the fact that this would still give a dishonest reflection of the true number of real life members, if unverified accounts created by spam bots are approved then it is still an artificial inflation of true member numbers!
 
Last edited:
6
•••
So I did find out what happened here:

What was done was any user that had not confirmed their email address was changed to confirmed in the database so that people could receive site emails

Feel free to test this out as well.

So it is not a certain user group any more? Or are the users who have not verified their emails have their own group?
 
0
•••
Webinvestments you are getting yourself all confused, I post to confirm that Adam Dicker may be telling the truth about his forum statistics and you press dislike?
 
4
•••
You doing all the dirty work for Shane now? Questions questions, they want answers? Are you getting into a new line of work,Pug?

Maybe Shane has a course on the darknet "how to get every question answered."

No guarantees though, but full of great advice
 
1
•••
@ WebInvestments , Nice of you to dislike my comment. So no questions allowed or what lol I said "
So it is not a certain user group any more? Or are the users who have not verified their emails have their own group?
"

I have been reading your posts and saw how you blindly supporting Adam but even with that , I never disliked any of your posts...hmmm... Maybe I should have done
 
1
•••
You doing all the dirty work for Shane now? Questions questions, they want answers? Are you getting into a new line of work,Pug?

Maybe Shane has a course on the darknet "how to get every question answered."

No guarantees though, but full of great advice

Literally no idea what you are blabbering on about. The evidence of 125,000 members being added to dnf in one day didn't even come from Shane.
 
1
•••
Why are you so keen to make this about other people? This is about Adam Dicker and the various people who feel like they were deceived out of time and/or money.

That's a fair question. First, let me say that just because I'm paranoid, that doesn't mean they're not out to get me.

The "other people" are supposed to be worthy of judgement of a participant's accomplishments, character, and benefit to the industry, among other things. After all, they are tasked with bestowing an industry award for Chrissake. Are the judges supposed to overlook ethically-challenged or perhaps criminal behavior? I would prefer they didn't.

There have been public record indications that IMHO Mr. Dicker wasn't perhaps truly worthy of any award or accolades, considering the negative nature of that public record. The UDRP decision was around 2006. The Godaddy TDNAM scandal was around 2008. This shit didn't pop up yesterday. There is, IMHO, certainly a trail of crumbs leading to the determination of character here. Did the judges overlook that? Are we to believe the judges didn't bother to scan the UDRP record to help in their decision? If they didn't bother to do their due-diligence before bestowing an award, then they contributed to the deception. If they did know about any ethically-questionable behavior, and still bestowed the award on a creep (subjective opinion), then that's even worse. Either way, they've lost credibility with me and probably others too. If you chose to continue to hold them in high esteem, I respect that, but cannot in good conscience agree with it.
 
2
•••
Dynadot โ€” .com TransferDynadot โ€” .com Transfer
Spaceship
Domain Recover
CatchDoms
DomainEasy โ€” Live Options
  • The sidebar remains visible by scrolling at a speed relative to the pageโ€™s height.
Back